what is the best mercedes to look for
 

Im looking for the right Merc for under 5k but I'm not sur what to look for I just want a basic diesel that gets good milage at least 25+ mpg.
I want a turbo.
I want to be able to tweak and upgrade it for verry little money and make a good amount of power like my first gen.
It needs to be reliable.
I dont care if the paint is in bad shape or if its dented I just dont want a rusty turd.
I dont want any computed controlled bull sh!t.
What is the lug pattern? because the stock rims are ugly
What kind of MPGs do you guys get?
please school me on these badass old dino burners:c::c:

---AutoMerged DoublePost---

here is the video that inspired me to start the search fo a old merc


---AutoMerged DoublePost---

and this

---AutoMerged DoublePost---

I just found a 1983 300sd with the 126 chasis in grey with no rust verry nice grey paint mercedes mechanic owned for 10 years primo interior ew tires 244000 miles claims he gets 30-35 mpg old ass ugly rims he wants 3 grand is this a good deal or bad

Anyone claiming to get 30-35mpg from a 1983 300SD is either lying or bad at math. Expect 24-28mpg from that car.

If you want 30-35mpg you need to look for a 190D (only available with a turbo for one year, 1987), or a 1990-1993 300D (all are turbos). If you want a fast diesel in stock form, look for a 1987 300D, these will get 26-30mpg or so.

The 1995 E300 was a non-turbo. All 1996-up MB diesels are completely computer controlled, with electronic injection pumps. The 98-99 turbos are awesome but outside your $5k budget.

:pca1:

Interesting.....:pca1:

thanks gsxr thats kinda what I figured with his milage mybe his speedo is wrong lol
I did see a 1987 on craigslist what is different about those as opposed to 82-86 300d s.
I think Im set on the 3 serries I used to have little small honda civics when I was younger now I just look like a gorrilla driving a small car when I get in one So I like the TANK appeal of the 3 serries

Do you mean a 1987 300D vs a 1982-1985 300D? They are totally different chassis, engine, everything. 1985 was the last year of the W123 chassis, it was replaced in 1986 with the W124 chassis. There was no diesel W124 imported to the USA in 1986, it arrived as a 1987 model only... approx 2500 sedans and 1500 wagons were imported. It was the most powerful MB diesel until the new DOHC intercooled turbo arrived in 1998. Anyway, the W124 chassis is an order of magnitude more advanced & refined than the W123... the W124 has standard ABS & airbag and handles like a sports car, it's quick, and quiet. The W123 is a land barge in comparison, noisy, and slower. You will likely pay double for a W124 (i.e., $2500-$5000) versus a W123 (i.e., $1000-$3000), but believe me, it's worth every penny. For a 1987 300D/TD buying guide, click here.



Be careful... the 1980's car badging is confusing. There is also a 300SD/300SDL, which is a W126 chassis, aka the "S class", from 1981-1991... this is the full-size MB. The W124 is the E-class, a mid-size car, from 1986-1995. The W201 is the 190-class (aka "C-class"), 1984-1993, the smallest MB sedan. But don't think a 300D and 300SD are both "3 series" - they are completely different cars. The 1987 300D/TD (W124) and 1987 300SDL (W126) share the same engine, but that's it.

The last year of the old-skool iron head OM617 diesel engine was 1985... everything used the new engine as of 1986-up. The W201 (190D) got the new engine two years earlier, in 1984. But it sounds like you want a larger car, not smaller... so check out the W124 and W126, from 1986-up.

:pca1:

I am new to this forum but I thought I might help with the Mercedes discussion. gsxr is correct in his explanation of the Model names for Mercedes. Unlike BMW (and most others) the number is not that relevant to the size of the body.

In fact, the number is a representation of the engine size of each model. The 300D and 300SD are both approximately a 3.0 Litre engine but the 300D is a midsized E-Class, while the 300SD is the "Luxury" (or Saloon) S-Class. The 190D is a Compact C-Class with a 1.9 Litre engine.

However the E-Class 300D is not a small car. I am 6-feet tall and 300 pounds and my 1985 300D fits very comfortably. It is a large sedan in the same class as an older Ford Taurus or a 500-series BMW. While the S-Class 300SD is a Luxury Sedan in the same class as a Lincoln Towncar or a 700-series BMW. I am confident neither will feel like a clown car to you. The biggest size difference is going to be felt in the backseat. While I can comfortably sit in the back seat of my 300D (even with the seat in front all the way back). A 300SD feels like a Limo in the back. It is designed for a luxury feeling in the back so that it can be used by people who "have drivers".

As for you suggestion of a particular model. I cannot recommend the W123 series highly enough. The 1980-1985 300TD Wagon and the 1981-1985 300D Sedan in my opinion are the perfect balance between features and bulletproof design. The famous 617 I5 engine is lauded by many as the most reliable engine ever mass-manufactured and my experience has found that to be true as well. I have 440,000 miles on my baby. And she is running like a champ.

The older 300D models and the concurrent 240D are just as reliable but lack a Turbocharger and you will notice the lack of "get up and go" without a Turbocharger.

After '85 the E-Class lost the cast iron head of the 617 that made it so reliable and was replaced with the 603 which had Aluminum heads. The E-Class did in fact have 300D's starting in 1986 (W124) but there were so many problems with the 603 that few of them have survived to this day. It took a couple of years for Mercedes to get the kinks worked out of this lighter (therefore more fuel efficient but also more unreliable) engine which is why there are far more '87 and later SD's around.

The W126 is hardly a bad car, they just are more likely to have a typical lifespan of dying after 200K or so miles. While it is rare for a W123 to die unless it is substantially neglected or wrecked. I have a good friend who drove his '84 300D from 600K to 750K and sold it for more than he bought it for, still running in fine condition.

There is also an amazing community of DIY-mechanics of W123 Mercedes who have insight and are always willing to give input on any problem you might have. Don't be confused if you decide to drive a 25-year old car you will have to get your hands dirty no matter how reliable she might be. But the W123 is a great car to learn some wrenching on.

I specifically got my 300D so I could learn more about how my car runs and build a more symbiotic relationship with my automobile. After alot of research I decided that a Diesel Mercedes and specifically a W123 would be perfect for this task. 4 years ago before I got her, the most car work I had done was changing the brake pads and rotors and changing an alternator or starter. Since I have been driving Gisele, I have learned to do my own A/C work and re-converted the A/C system back to R12, repaired a broken B2-band piston in the Transmission, Replaced the Upper Control Arms of the front suspension, and last weekend, I rewired the Glow Plug system from the Keyed Automatic Relay to a Manual Relay using a push-button system that can be run as long as needed including after the car has started to help with carbon coking in the Glow Plug chambers.

The W123 is an easy to learn system that I think is by far the best Mercedes (if not vehicle) you can get.

Good Luck,
Aaron

Minor clarification: The badge number only indicated engine size some of the time through 1993. The 190 class never had any 1.9L engine... there was a 2.2L and 2.5L diesel in the 190D, plus a 2.3L and 2.6L gas engine available in the 190E. Thankfully, Mercedes simplified the badging in 1994, where the letter came first and indicated the chassis, and the numbers came after the letter and always did indicate engine displacement. This only lasted through about 2002 or so, at which point MB stupidly started having the numbers only indicate engine size some of the time. The current system is still easier & more useful than the old pre-94 badging, but the number no longer definitively indicates engine size like it did from 1994 through 2002 (approx).



I have to politely disagree, although I understand your viewpoint. I owned three different W123's and hope to never own another. They are nearly bulletproof, but that is about all they have going for them, IMO. The W124 was an order of magnitude more advanced in nearly every way, and is no more difficult to repair or maintain. I currently own several W124's and have had 124's with 6-cyl & V8 gas engines, as well as 5- and 6-cyl diesels.



You are too kind. The 240D is an absolute pig (I owned one, with manual tranny) and the 300D non-turbo wasn't much better. Neither get great fuel economy either - mid 20's is typical. The newer models with turbos had decent power and better economy, but even those were substantially below the W124/W201 diesel economy & performance.



Whoa, whoa, whoa. There were not so many problems with the 603 that few have survived! MB simply did not import many to the USA... about 4k total W124's and ~10k W126's (I think), compared to the literally several hundred thousand W123/OM617's that were imported. The 603's were absolutely NOT more unreliable. The first couple years of production (86/87) of the 603 did have a couple of design flaws which were fixed, and MB continued to produce these engines through 1995 worldwide. My 1987 300D has 313kmi on the odo and still going strong. The OM603 (3.0L) was about 20% more powerful and 20% more fuel efficient than the 3.0L OM617, not to mention quieter, and without requiring manual valve adjustments. Now, the 3.5L version in the early 90's was kind of a lemon - but that's a different discussion, and very few of those were imported to the USA.



There's no reason the W123, W124, W126, or any other MB from the 80's/90's can't go >500kmi if maintained properly. Most never get driven enough to rack up that kind of mileage, or get wrecked prematurely. There's a guy on a different MB forum with a W124 V8 gasser that has over 500kmi and never had the valve covers off, disproving the common misconception that the MB gas engines need a rebuild by 200k (total BS, other than the M103 gassers needing valve guides at ~200k). The W126 will last just as long as any W123 given the same maintenance treatment - regardless of what engine is under the hood.



Why not convert to an automatic afterglow system instead of manual? This was used from the factory from 1990-up... I converted my '87 to the factory setup, works great. You don't want to run the glow plugs any longer than needed as it shortens their lifespan considerably. The factory setup only runs the afterglow on a cold engine, based on a coolant temp sensor. There are aftermarket kits for the 617, although you could also use the OM602 factory afterglow relay (pick one up cheap on eBay to save a few bucks).



The W123 is slightly easier to work on & maintain, but until you've owned a W124 for a while, you can't quite claim it's the best MB (or vehicle) you can get. OK, yes, I am biased since I've owned a total of eleven different W124's over the years... but I did own three W123's for comparison, and one W201 (190D). When possible, please buy a nice W124 and after about a year of ownership, let us know if you'd still prefer the W123. Very few people come back to the W123 after spending time in a good W124 (no beat-up abused junkers!). Most of the time I find that W123 owners either don't want to spend more $$$ to move into the W124, or they are scared that it's "too complicated" (it's not - believe me). It's worth it though.


:c:

I definitely like to get my butt on a 124. An office mate paid me to drive one from San Jose to New Mexico when I was there for work. I drove the car straight in just over a day going 75-85 the whole way.

Hi,
Could you elaborate on your statement about the 3.5L being a bit of a lemon.
Looking for a decent older Mercedes Diesel and I would appreciate any info or suggestions you have.

TY

The 3.5L was known as the "rodbender". It's still a mystery as to why the majority of failures were on US models, and not European models, as they used identical engine internals. But anyway, on a significant number of the 3.5L engines in the USA, the rods would bend slightly (usually #1 or #6) and cause abnormal wear on the cylinder or pistons, resulting in increased oil consumption, and eventually smoking & low power. When it gets that bad (smoking, power loss, and burning a quart of oil every ~500 miles) they usually need a rebuild. Mercedes released updated/stronger connecting rods in the late 90's, and the factory replacement motors use the updated rods... there have been nearly zero reported failures on rebuilt engines with the updated rods. If you have a 3.5L engine with the original "weak" rods, you can prevent the failure by replacing all six rods proactively. Note that the 3.5L engine was only used in the S-class from 1990-1995 (350SD, 350SDL, S350) and VERY few were imported to the USA. You'd likely need to search nationwide to find any for sale. Models with documented factory engine replacement are obviously worth more as these should not ever have the rod problem again. If you do some Googling, you'll find lots more info on this. Personally, I would love a 94-95 S350 with a rebuilt motor... incredible car, but extremely rare.



Depends if you want small, medium, or large body (small = 190D, medium = 300D/E300, large = 300SD/300SDL/350SDL/S350). And, then it depends if you want maximum fuel economy, or max power. Example: The 1990-93 300D is a great car, 30-34mpg, but a tad underpowered. The "fast" ones will be 1987 or 1998-99. Max fuel economy will be any 190D with a 5-speed manual (36-40mpg, depending if it's the 2.2L or 2.5L). The older iron-head engines (300D/SD through 1985) are about 20% less fuel efficient, 20% less powerful, noisier, and need regular manual valve adjustments. They are cheap and plentiful though. Avoid the 240D unless you enjoy scraping dead bugs off the back of the car.

:s:

Valtonen Motorsport 123 for sale .
Newer pictures ,
CAR SPOTLIGHT>> VALTONEN MOTORSPORT W123 - Speedhunters

Only serious offers or questions !
valtonen.motorsport@gmail.com

I have been looking at the 300d for some time now. I did not know that the 87 was so much better with the turbo 6. Thanks for the info. I just found one local to me for $2k. Maybe I should look into it more and try to snag it.

*edit* I just realized I brought this back from the dead, came across it on google. I first saw the date on the earlier post and then realized we are now in 2013...

~George

For $2k it will likely be a fixxer-upper, but if the body and interior are in decent shape, it's probably worth trying to save it. The primary thing to look at is the cylinder head casting number, if it's a #14 (original), make sure to check for abnormal pressure in the cooling system cold or hot. If it has a newer head, that's awesome. Use the buyer's guide I linked to above for other items to look at. I never find these for sale locally, I'd be all over one for $2k...

:D

Thanks, I will look into it more. Where are the casting numbers stamped on them? BTW what kind of fuel mileage could I expect with daily interstate travail at 74mph? Is that a good cruising speed for these cars or will the rpm's be way up there like some other older cars?
~George

---AutoMerged DoublePost---

I am going to take a new job that is 30 miles away vs my current 6 miles and don't want to rack the miles on my truck or get the lower fuel millage. So I am looking for a good commuter car, and I like the older stuff, currently debating between a Classic Saab 900T coup and the 300D, just wish the 87 300D came as a manual. I am a body man and mechanic by trade so the age and miner repairs won't bother me that much. But we will see. Here are two that aren't too far away...
87 Mercedes 300 turbo diesel
87 mercedes 300d

It's in this document (also linked above), see item #16:
http://www.w124performance.com/docs/...uying_tips.txt



This depends on the overall condition of the engine & chassis, and the quality of diesel fuel where you live. Best numbers for straight highway will be 30-32mpg, maybe a smidge more if you are into hypermiling. With crappy diesel, or any chassis issues, this could drop to 26-28mpg. Realistically, I'd expect somewhere in the middle, probably around 28-30mpg.



This model has a 2.65 final drive and will be 3000rpm at 75mph. It will happily cruise all day long at this speed. Years ago I was able to drive my 87 300D for an extended period (few hours) at around 90mph (approx 3600rpm) and I was shocked to find the fuel economy was unchanged, I got the same MPG that tank as I usually did at 70-75 mph. YMMV, etc. A manual transsmision swap is possible but the ROI is pretty lousy. If you want higher MPG, get a 190D diesel with a 5-speed (and half the power).


I'd be all over that blue one at $2700, btw... if it really is the second owner and well maintained, that's a steal.

:c:

So I talked to both the owners. The blue one is owned my a guy that is 77 years old and bought it from one of his friends 20 years ago this easter. He said it has 375k on it and the trans leaks about a qt every few months, the cruise does not work, and it has a dime size rust spot on it but he can't remember quite where it was at. But it has always been garage kept and had a new fuel pump put in about 4 years ago and its never been smoked in. He said the motor has never been touched except a relay that had something to do with engine idle and he said its on its 3rd a/c compressor but it works great. What do you think? Its a little over 3 hours away and I might go look at it...

The other one sounds like its got too many issues for me, but it did have a new head on it.

Transmission needs a re-seal if it shifts ok, probably under $50 in seals/gaskets but a real pain to do the work unless you pull the trans out (and if the front pump seal is leaking, the trans has to come out). Cruise control is almost guaranteed to be a dead amplifier, very common, usually available under $100 used on eBay. Pretty likely it will need some other misc work but if you can get it at a decent price, it's probably worth it.

I bet the three AC compressors was due to being converted to R-134a. Real shame. Those conversions are system killers.

Don't forget to read the article I linked above, it will give you ideas of what to look for.

:pca1:

IDK what I am thinking. The car is still a 87 with 375k mi. $2700 can buy some newer cars that get better MPG and have more zip along with some nice options too. I just don't know what I want but would like it to be somewhat unique...

There are a number of newer, cheaper cars that get better MPG. Pretty much any VW TDI will be 10+ years newer and get mid/upper 40's. Part of the reason I drive MB's now (and don't drive VW's anymore) is the safety aspect. When you get hit by some cellphone-weilding idiot, would you rather be in a VW (or Japanese econobox), or the MB?

:w2:

Yea I am going to look at some VW's. As far a the safety aspect. I like motorcycles, but the wife will settle with anything with 4 wheels being as safe. Not to mention I do like heat when it cold out. But all the same, thanks for the info.

Yeah, I used to race sportbikes, and I've spent a decent amount of time on two wheels. You won't see me on a bike without full Dainese leathers though.

I got into VW's in the eary 90's due to the relatively low cost and high MPG of the VW diesels. They are nice little cars. But once I got my first Mercedes (W201/W124), and started seeing firsthand the difference between a German car built to a price (VW) and a German car that was not (MB), I eventually reduced my VW fleet and converted to MB's. My last VW was sold a few years ago. The MB's don't cost much more to work on and they are soooo much nicer for most DIY repairs.... IMO, anyway.

:pca1:

I got an 81 300SD with who knows how many miles. Drove it home.....$400. Needs a bit of work, but it just keeps on truckin along. Cruising smooth, and gets (I'm guessing) 22mpg. Beats the 11mpg my F100 gets.

I bought 2 '76 300d's exact twins, vin #'s consecutive for $500 for the 2, they had been sitting for 16 years. they ran pretty good a little rusty but good runners. I like the pre 1980 models,

Mercedes Durability?
 

An acquaintance who is a Chartered Accountant bought a new Mercedes diesel about three or four years ago. It never seemed to run properly so it was taken back to the main dealers several times but the diagnostics were clueless. Just after the guarantee had expired it was found that the fault was bent con-rods "Have you been driving through water Sir?" After some haggling Mercedes did in fact provide a replacement engine as the fault had been noticed within guarantee. As the job would have normally cost £8000 this was a great relief but there is always the worry that the fault may recur.

An old colleagues sister's partner is a wealthy funeral director. He bought a new large sized Mercedes diesel for his business. Allegedly the car has a "clever" transmission (dual clutch transmission perhaps?) that can be operated either as an automatic or as a manual transmission. The transmission uses special lubricant which is cooled by running a pipe through the radiator. Allegedly the transmission fluid corrodes the pipe and boiling hot water then surges into the transmission. The transmission then explodes and spews its cogs out onto the road. The car was repaired under guarantee but twelve months later the fault repeated with cogs all over the road once again. His comments were "Fifty seven thousand pounds-worth of crap!"

I recently purchased an old Mercedes-Benz W124 300TD as "Spares or Repair" 233,000 miles. It was on a SORN and untaxed so a test drive was not possible. The declared fault was the alternator not charging. I cured this by fitting a new regulator and returned a week later with a fresh battery, fresh tax and insurance. The drive home was unexciting as the car is a just a huge slow whale of a thing with a greatly despised slush box. I only drove it the once but after that 130 mile trip the coolant had disappeared from the reservoir bottle! Later it was discovered that the oil level was half an inch above the high mark so presumably the lost water is now in the oil pan. Its next trip could well be to the scrapyard as I'm disinclined to spend time and money on a car that I hate. The story about the "million mile engine" is a myth.:moon:

Oddly, there are a few million other Mercedes on the road which did not experience catastrophic failure.

:humm:

They are only million dollar engines if you keep up with the maintenance on them. This is specially with the 617 engine 12-15K valve adjustment and most of the time people don't do this. The 2.8 million miles taxi was a non turbo version and the driver circulated 3 engines during that time. Not a million mile engine and probably before the 1 million you will have replaced the injection pump and turbo. I loved them but they are not economical or powerful and many folks just use them as noxious incinerators for their used oil or ATF fluids. They do not get over 25 mpg I have a 617 and it had well adjusted valves, almost leak free and I barely got 25 combined even driving conservatively.

The engine to get is the the 603 or 602 specially the 602 which is as powerful as the 617 at 2.5 l and both don't need the quarterly valve adjustment. Those cost 200 - 300 a pop if you don't do it yourself. And the chain loosens and usually should be replaced as well as often as a TDI (80-100K). Considering the everyone wants a premium on these cars, I upgraded to a TDI and in the long run (I calculate 2 years) I will spend less on the upkeep than my MB diesel.

I still love them but a cummins or a powerstoke 7.3 they are not. I personally know a 832 K cummins 12v and a 790K PSD that did not need their heads removed. The most I've seen on an MB is 412K and it ran pretty bad and on its second Injection Pump.

The 602/603 are a good 20% more efficient than the 616/617 and produce even more power while maintaining the economy gain. Pretty amazing, IMO.

Only a few years (around 1991-1994) had timing chain issues due to a defective batch of chains, there is a factory service bulletin on this. The defective chains stretch prematurely. Once replaced, they last almost forever. The chains don't need to be replaced proactively like TDI belts, you measure chain stretch, and if it exceeds the limit, replace it. With proper oil change intervals this translates into about 250-300kmi with dino, and with synthetic the chain wear almost stops entirely.

It's hard to compare trucks to MB's for high mileage because most MB's are not used the same way. I know of several MB diesels in the 400k-600k range. Don't forget that if you have a monthly payment on the TDI, that's still money out of your wallet, even if you're spending less on upkeep.

:pca1:

I am not making payments on my TDI It is not a new one. 4200 with a new IP, turbo and 40 K miles before the next timing belt job from today. I have never made payments on a car, well maybe once but it was against my 401K and I paid myself basically. This TDI is also the ALH engine, regarded as the best TDI to have kind of like a 12v or 7.3.

We drive a lot. Two kids do competitive gymnastics and the meets are on different states sometimes 6-9 times a year each. Since October we have put 20 K miles on our TDI and if I have the Benz 300D W123, I would have to do the valves twice already and got half the mileage of the TDI plus it has a flaxky aircon, slow etc. I loved them but can't do it any longer. Do it yourself you can change the TDI belt for about 400. Work overtime a couple of weeks and I can pay my mechanic to do the TB for 900.


I've seen chains detonate on the 617 as well maybe more than the 603 or 602. We drive a lot. I will be getting a 1992 2.5L 300D MB in July if my friend will let it go by that time :)



---AutoMerged DoublePost---

Sorry to have change the topic to TDI. The best Mercedes to have IMO is the rare 190D Manual with the 2.5 engine, then the 1990-1993 2.5 L 300D TurboDiesel, it is a better style car and then the 1987 300D which is the most powerful Diesel car until 1998 with the Computer controlled e300 Diesel. After that it is lofty territory with the new Benzes with the CDI and then Bluetec,

And the TB job on the TDI is actually a lot of stuff including the waterpump and a coolant change. In my opinion it is a good thing to do all of that at 100K miles on any car.

Thanks

New engine on a 1991 300SD
 

"When it gets that bad (smoking, power loss, and burning a quart of oil every ~500 miles) they usually need a rebuild. Mercedes released updated/stronger connecting rods in the late 90's, and the factory replacement motors use the updated rods... there have been nearly zero reported failures on rebuilt engines with the updated rods"

When did MB start releasing the engines with the better support for the rods? I'm looking at buying a 1991 300SD turbo diesel that had it's engine replaced in 1997...everything else about the car seems to be dreamy...

If the motor was replaced with a new or factory rebuild motor in 1997, it should be fine. It seems the updated rods appeared around 1996, or basically right after production ended. Ask the owner how many miles per quart it is using between oil changes. If it's zero, or near zero, you're golden.

:c:

I was wondering about this myself. Great info guys, helped answer my questions

Ok so this thread has been extremely helpful and had helped orchestrate my first mb purchase as well (will be next week).... I'm looking seriously at a 1987 300d that is extremely clean with 150k miles but it's off eBay and it's a cali version, I can't find any information on the difference between the federal and cali anywhere... Any help would be appreciated. The other is the 1991 350sd that had approx 115k miles on a replaced engine from '97... It's from the original owner and has every service record ever done. I'm sick between these two, any suggestions?

1987 300D were the same nationwide, nothing different for CA. If you're looking at the one in CO (light ivory), I know the owner, it should be a pretty nice car.

The 1991 350SD is a totally different car. The S-class is much larger, and combined with the bigger engine, fuel economy will be lower too. Sounds well maintained and has the motor replaced which is good.

Kinda depends if you want a mid-size car with better fuel economy, or if you need a larger vehicle.

:pca1:

The '87 was from a dealer in Illinois, I unexpectedly won the bid at 3800, which just makes me paranoid that it ended so cheap for such a clean car of this of this type with low miles...

Cograts! Let us know how you like the car once you have it in your driveway.

If you haven't yet seen this, read my writeup on things to check out on a 1987 300D/TD:
http://www.w124performance.com/docs/...uying_tips.txt


:c:

Newbie Help Too
 

So, I followed this thread and realized there were lots of smart people here who could help me overcome my ignorance. :jump:

I got an old 83 VW Rabbit for free from my dad about a year ago. It was pretty much a piece of yard art. I brought it back to life and you can see pics and such here: My exciting diesel rabbit story

So earlier this week, while driving to work, the engine stalled. After a restart and getting it through the intersection and another stall, I popped the hood. Timing belt had come off. :( So here's where I hope you all come in.

After bringing that car back from the dead, I'm sold on diesel. I think they are just awesome compared to gassers. I'm tired of working on that old car and the wife refuses to ride in it.

What do you all recommend for the following:

- Haul me back and forth to work each day (about 30 miles round trip)
- Big enough for me, wife, and my 2 kiddos
- AC that runs on 134a (I converted my rabbit without much issue)
- I can't be under the hood all the time. I want it to be reliable and I can do maint
- Get 25+ MPG
- I'd like to spend between $2K - $5K (my ignorance is in knowing if thats a good range)

Is there an MBD that fits the bill? Maybe something in another make/model?

All help with this is greatly appreciated, I don't want to lose my sanity as a newbie trying to figure this out. :argh:

It depends what size MB you are looking for... small (190D), medium (300D/E300), or large (300SDL, S350). Most any of them in good mechanical shape will not have you under the hood "all the time" but hey, for a <$5k car, you'll be doing repairs occasionally. All 1993-up have R-134a system from the factory (1992 might have R-134a also - I forget the exact year break, it was 91 or 92). Original R-12 systems don't work well when converted, so I'd try and stick with a 93+ model if you are anti-R12, or anti-conversion. All of the 1986+ models should get over 25mpg, some will be 30-35 depending on the model/year.

I'd probably try to find a 1995-1997 E300, if you can locate a decent one for ~$5k. The 96-97 are the newer W210 chassis which is a step down in quality, but the powertrain is still great. 1997 has the 5-speed electronic tranny which is awesome. If you could afford a 98-99 turbo versions that would be ideal but I doubt you'll find a nice one for $5k. All these should be in the 30-35mpg range.

Second choice would be a 1992-1993 300D. I had one for a few years, it averages 30-34mpg under most conditions, power is decent, etc. If you live in the snow belt, try to find a car with the optional heated seats.

If you need a "large" car, that's a different discussion... the 90-95 S-class diesel has the rodbending issue, the 86-87 has the head issue, both will end up in the 25-28mpg range, 86-87 has R12, etc... lots more variables to consider.

:humm:

I'm looking for a mid-size. The car would be my daily driver to work and then I'd want to be able to put the family in it comfortably at times. I have a large SUV for hauling stuff around and lots of people.

I checked craiglist in my area and found some cars, but they are all 80's vintage. There were about 5 local as seen here on CL None really seem like something to get too excited about. Not sure why someone would post their car with a bunch of mattresses on the roof for example!

My wife said: NO! to any Benz or BMW, saying that they break too much and are too expensive to fix. I had an old 533i that had an overheating issue and some other stuff. I bought it used and should have paid more attention. I don't think the one car, which was a gasser, really tells the story of diesel Benzs. Thoughts?

That white 87 300D for $2k might be worth a look, but the mileage is high, and it sounds like it's a fixxer-upper (i.e., HVAC fan not working). Seems a bit tired & worn, but the price ain't bad, especially if you can get them down further. For a detailed buyer's guide on the 1987 300D/TD, click here. If the car has the "high cold pressure" symptom, you probably should walk away, it's a ~$2k repair when the head crack gets worse. If it happens to have a newer head casting, then it's not an issue. Only way to tell is to go see the car and look at the head casting number. The owner will probably have no clue.

The 190D is a small car, probably not what you're looking for. The 1985 and older 300D's are dinosaurs... no ABS, no airbag, slow, noisy, leaky, and generally going in the wrong direction. Not to mention they're right around your 25mpg minimum for fuel economy.

The white 1991 300D for $500 that needs a tranny could be a good deal, if you had time to fix it:
1991 D Class mercedes 300 D class

Most likely you would need to expand your search to neighboring states, or plan on searching daily for months until you find the right car locally. I did not see a single 1995-1999 E300 for sale. Check eBay and AutoTrader too.

Well maintained (read: not cheap beater) Mercedes do not break often, and if you can do your own repair work, they are not expensive to fix. If you have to pay a mechanic for everything, just forget the whole idea, and go buy a new VW with 10-year warranty.

:w2:

gskr, thanks for the great input.

That 91 300D appears to have either been sold or just relisted for $1100. I don't think the original ad listed it as a turbo. New Ad Here

So in general would you agree that if I shop around $4 - $5K should buy me some reliable transportation?

I put a new timing belt on my rabbit last night and when I started it up, the engine sounded horrible. Pretty sure the valves are bent, so I definately need to shop around for a new vehicle. Thanks again for the replies, especially since I'm on the hunt for something new. Much appreciated!