I got a '83 240d and a '85 330sd. I really like the size and feel of the 240d and I like the power of the 5 cylinder turbo. What can you guys tell me about the feel of the 5 cylinder turbo in the w123 body? Does the turbo give more performance to the w123 then the w126? Is the fuel economy of a 5 cylinder turbo a lot better with the w123 then w126?
What are your opinions?
Thanks,
Buck

IMHO the W123 300D Turbo is the best of both worlds. It basically acts like a 240D with twice the power. The turbo has reasonable power and higher gears, so it will actually run at highway speeds (80-85 mph all day long). The biggest disadvantages (compared to the 240D) are the complex/expensive climate control system (which I actually like when it works correctly) and the fuel mileage is somewhat lower. I don't have any experience with W126s, but they are too big for what I want/need.

Buck, you will find that the 300D is more agile, peppier, and gets a little better mileage than the 300SD. It weighs less and the transmission gearing ratios are higher. Around town the 300D performs better. On the highway, the 300SD is a more stately cruiser.

__________________
85 300CD Signal Red/Tan sold
83 300D Manganese Brown 109K
97 E420 Midnight Blue 197K sold
98 BMW 328i Vert White 100K, sold
95 BMW 525i White 125K, sold
93 BMW 525iT Red 193K, sold
95 E320 Green Wagon 125K, sold
94 E320 White 127K, sold
85 300SD 156K Grey (Annie), sold
84 300D Lapis Blue 170K (Judy), sold
99 ML 320 Black (lease), 1998 C230 White (lease)
00 Honda S2000 Red (lease)
86 Mercedes 300E (sold)
84 Porsche 911 Red (sold), 1965 Porsche 911 White (sold)

I have both. I think variations in individual cars is enough to discount any difference in power/economy between 123 and 126. My 123 gets somewhat better mileage and feels peppier, bit only by a small margin. It handles better and feels smaller. Not as refined and I don't think it has quite the "oooo" factor.
I also had a 240 4-speed. If you liked the 240, you will love a 300D.

__________________
1984 300Sd 210k

Former cars:
1984 300D 445k (!!) (Strider) Original (and not rebuilt) engine and transmission. Currently running on V80 ( 80% vegetable oil, 20% petroleum products). Actually not, taking a WVO break.
1993 300d 2.5 275k. Current 120/day commuter
1981 300SD 188k (Hans) Killed by a deer

These folks pretty much covered it all.

Personally though, I'd rather walk than drive a W123 on a daily basis. Firstly, the car is too small for me, it is more prone to rust than the W126, it is much less refined (it was a cheaper car than the W126 afterall, and was actually the entry-level "poor man's" Benz), and the worst part of it to me is the exterior styling: the car truly looks as old as it actually is. I've had several people guess my W126 as being from the mid 90s... not sure if that would ever happen with a W123 - if it has happened to any of you W123 owners out there I'd like to read about it. Even when equipped with Euro lights, the bumper of the W123 gives it away as a very old car (the W126 was actually the first car in the world to have bumpers covered with plastic). The W126 just looks much better and has many amenities that aren't even standard on all cars being made today, stuff like airbags, ABS, ASR (later W126s), power seats, rear seat reading lights, automatic climate control, factory theft deterent system, etc. It is actually very amazing to me when I think that my 21 year old luxury car has more standard features than the average 2006 car!

__________________
1999 Mercedes-Benz S600, 103K miles - garage queen
1988 Mercedes-Benz 560SEL, 89K miles - daily driver
2007 Hyundai Sonata Limited, 31K - daily driver

This is what drove me to get the 126 over the 123. The feature set on the 126 does make quite a difference. Though, I do think the 123 is still a pretty timeless design.

On real bad pavement (or no pavement) the 123 beats the 126 hands down.

__________________
82 300D....went to MB heaven
90 350 SDL....excercising con rods

That's interesting, you've done a very good job of listing all the reasons I prefer the W123. The mid-90's styling (plastic bumpers, etc.) is what I like least about the 126's. Other than the body style, I would like to have some of the W126 features (although I can do without airbags, ABS, ASR, and power seats). IMHO, the 70s/80s style MBs look classic, while the 90s styles (especially 124s and later 126s) just look dated. Maybe in 10 more years the 90s style will be more appealing?

'it is more prone to rust than the W126'

Not from what I've seen(i.e. what's that hiding under the plastic body cladding, hmmm??)

'it is much less refined (it was a cheaper car than the W126 afterall, and was actually the entry-level "poor man's" Benz)'

I beg your pardon! Not so, not so...300D in '85 MSRP $35k= $55k today...

'and the worst part of it to me is the exterior styling: the car truly looks as old as it actually is. I've had several people guess my W126 as being from the mid 90s... not sure if that would ever happen with a W123 - if it has happened to any of you W123 owners out there I'd like to read about it. Even when equipped with Euro lights, the bumper of the W123 gives it away as a very old car (the W126 was actually the first car in the world to have bumpers covered with plastic)'

Hmmm...plastic covered bumpers. I wouldn't consider that a plus. Nope.

w123s are tanks, very classic proportional lines, much better looking than a w126 with much more character. a w126 just looks like a linebacker wearing ballet slippers to me. Big bulky body with little itty-bitty feet. I think my w123 rides like it's on a cushion of air. It also handles great.
Besides, w123s consistently bring more $$ on the open market than w126s(not counting SDLs). I have observed this time and time again. I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.
I will give props to the w126 interior though. Now the w140 is a different story. That's a handsome car in SEL trim. I'll also come out and say that the SDL w126s are quite handsome too. But the regular SDs are not my cup of tea.
Tell ya one thing though- w126s make great OM617 donors

__________________
'02 BMW 325i
'85 300D 450k
'93 190E 2.6 170k(killed by tree)
'08 Ducati Hypermotard 1100S 6k
'06 Ducati S2R800 14k(sold)

Tastes differ folks, I'm not trying to say the W123 is plain bad, but it is a piece of junk to me. It has legions of fans out there and those people obviously aren't all crazy. Or are they?


That's the issue right there. Whereas the W126s obviously rust too, they are less prone, and even if they rust inside the plastic trim, I can't see it. I'd definitely hate driving around in a rusted out car that's very visible. You W123 owners commonly have to put up with that. I can't do it. No way!

Yes, the 300D wasn't cheap in 1985 (NO BENZ WAS CHEAP BACK THEN!) but it was the very cheapest car bearing the three pointed star before the 190s came out. So it was the cheap benz, cheap meaning the least expensive benz. Of course the least expensive benz back then cost more than the most expensive Chevy!

Again, the plastic covered bumpers contribute to the looks of the car. I just hate those old metal bumpers with the rubber parts... ugh! Couldn't dare own a car with one of them. I guess I like to have a car with elegant, attractive looks. Also, the W126 being an S-Class, the best car in the world as far as I'm concerned makes it very attractive to me.

__________________
1999 Mercedes-Benz S600, 103K miles - garage queen
1988 Mercedes-Benz 560SEL, 89K miles - daily driver
2007 Hyundai Sonata Limited, 31K - daily driver

The W123's are a nice little car but kind of small for my tastes. I really like the way a powerful W126 feels on the highway. W123's 300D's are pretty quick, kind of slow compared to the diesels I am used to but not bad.

Every 80's Benz would rust, I have seen some it in some amazing places two. Thats one thing MB's do well they don't rust out in the normal places like American cars, Ie fenders, under the doors ect. MB's rot from the inside out, the frame rails will rot before the fenders.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

And that's great for me, who would like to drive an old car that's reliable but doesn't look like a rust bucket. Sure it MAY be a rust bucket, but it doesn't LOOK it. To me, that works.

__________________
1999 Mercedes-Benz S600, 103K miles - garage queen
1988 Mercedes-Benz 560SEL, 89K miles - daily driver
2007 Hyundai Sonata Limited, 31K - daily driver

Kids today?

I hope you're kidding about rust being OK if you can't see it. I suspect most folks here would agree that any rust is unacceptable whether you can see it or not. BTW, there's nothing wrong with W126s, or any of the newer S-class cars, I'm just not interested in owning one. Trust me, no one else is impressed by the fact that we drive a 10 or 20 year old MB. You can't swing a dead cat around here without hitting a new S or E benz, just another car.

Precisely. Rust is unacceptable regardless of if you can see it or not. But then, if it is already there, then I'd rather not have it visible. Hey, just making the best of a negative situation. If my car is old and rusted, I'd much rather not be reminded of it each time I look at it.

__________________
1999 Mercedes-Benz S600, 103K miles - garage queen
1988 Mercedes-Benz 560SEL, 89K miles - daily driver
2007 Hyundai Sonata Limited, 31K - daily driver

I feel the 123 is a better car around town or for single occupant cruising. I have only driven a few 126's but the 123 seems to handle better if the suspension has been redone. That said I like 126's very much and they were my first choice until my 123 appeared. If I was going to go for a 126 I would just jump in with both feet and get a 86-87 SDL. If you are going to have all the extras you may as well have that nice 603 as well. RT

__________________
When all else fails, vote from the rooftops!
84' Mercedes Benz 300D Anthracite/black, 171K
03' Volkswagen Jetta TDI blue/black, 93K
93' Chevrolet C2500HD ExCab 6.5TD, Two-tone blue, 252K