I bought an 80 Olds with re-designed engine new. It had the roller cam and that was great advantage on those engines. It had quite good performance in the cutlass Sedan body. I would think zero to 60 time was better then on the turbo 617, though I think the Benz is a little heavier. We got 100,000 plus miles on that car with really no problems, and excellent fuel mileage. Again, I think fuel economy was better then on the 617 turbo. At the time fuel was so cheap, nobody worried too much about mileage. Then in 83 I bought an 83 Cadillac couple, which was a low mileage "Factory" demo. We did not get good service out of that car. Head gasket problems at about 50,000, then the starter, then the transmission, then head gasket again and I got out of it at about 90,000. Again, it was great on the highway, mileage was incredible and performance was not bad, I think much like my 85 300D, although it did not have much top end. I think it was pretty much run out at 90. These engines were converted gas engines about like the 617 is a converted gas engine. And remember, all Benz diesels were not all that great either. Look at the 220 diesels of the late 60's and early 70's. A lot of people thought they were pure junk.

__________________
Junqueyardjim
Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important. C.S. Lewis



1983 Mercedes W123 240D 4 Speed 285,000 on the road with a 617 turbo, beautiful butter yellow, license plate # 83 240D INDIANA

2003 Jaguar Type X, AWD. beautiful, good mileage,
Mom's car, but I won't let her drive it!