Mercedes 300D vs Volvo 240 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

tenknots · #1 12-15-2005, 03:53 PM

I spend a lot of seat time commuting 130 miles a day and really get to know a car well. I’ve driven Strider over 10,000 miles in the last 3 months or so exclusively, and have come to appreciate him immensely. But for two days, I’ve driven our spare car, a 1987 Volvo 240. The reason is that Strider runs on a wvo/rug blend which is still experimental – I don’t really know at what point the fuel may gel and leave me stranded – so far 29F has been fine. But for the last two days, I’ve had some meetings at work that CAN’T be missed, so I took the Volvo.

Exploring the two car’s personalities was interesting to me – and I expect there are a few MB owners who also have the venerable Volvo 240. Here’s my take:

5:00 am. It’s cold – about 19F. I slip into the Volvo and the first thing I notice is the seats. They’re narrower than a 300D, but firmer. Without springs to sag and break, this 18 year old car still has comfortable seats. The seats are heated and have no perceptible wear. I stick the key in, turn it, and instantly it starts and settles down to a smooth even idle. No waiting, no feathering the throttle, just go. I turn on the headlights and I’m shocked by the brightness of instrument panel. My daughter has a 1984 Volvo 240 – the same age as Strider – and the dash lights are plenty bright. Who was on vacation the day they were designing 300D dash lights?

As I back out of the long driveway, I notice the wheel is several sizes too small – it’s almost comical compared to the substantial wheel on the 300D. But the turning radius of the Volvo is tighter than any car I’ve ever driven. And the steering is TIGHT. Rack and pinion rocks – the feel is great and there is no looseness, though Volvo people will tell you that the steering rack is prone to failure and good ones are not cheap. Driving down the dirt road it feels like Volvo replaced the shocks with rebar- bonejarring! Where is that controlled firm suppleness the MB has? As I bounce down the road, I notice the head lights are much better than Strider. This is the model with the headlights that have been less-than-favorably compared to a TV – they’re huge and funny-looking. But they are bright. After the stop sign on the top of the hill, I am thrown back on my seat when I hit the go pedal the same as I would in Strider. Very little movement of the pedal translates to LOTS of power – more than even my wife’s ALDA-massaged 300SD could dream of. Instant and lots of power (relatively speaking). As I bounce uncomfortably down the road, I notice lots of small dashboard rattles. The Volvo dash is made from hard plastic, rather than the smooth, softer stuff in the MB. It rattles. Strider can go down the same road with nary a rattle or squeak (this Volvo has 140k vs, 410k on Strider). Now, I’m not so sure it’s rebar in the shocks – I think someone in Sweden got a good deal on cement truck suspension springs and put them in 240’s.

Volvos are designed for cold weather (they are Swedish after all) and their heaters are said to be first rate. It’s true the heater comes on about two minutes before Strider’s does, but at the price of a fan that sounds like what happens when you put your head out the car window at 100 mph. Even on low, it’s noticeable. And I’ll be danged if I don’t have to TELL it to turn down the fan and adjust the heat with MY OWN HANDS. Strider knows what I like and takes care of it for me. And in truth, aside from getting heat a couple of minutes sooner, the heater is no better than Strider’s.

Stopping at the first light, I notice the brake pedal is spongier than Strider’s, though that might mean some air in the brake lines. No surprise, if you’ve ever had to bleed a 240’s brakes. Volvo has a parallel system that allow 3 wheels to have brake power if any one system fails. But to do that requires a brake bleeding scheme that requires an engineering degree. It just doesn’t get done. But the brakes are really good when pushed – all four wheels have discs like the MB and they work at least as well. At the stop light, I keep thinking the engine has died. Instead of a comforting I-can-do-this-for-ever clatter, I get a barely perceptible vibration. The 4-cyliner engine has been around forever and is so durable because it’s a 1) truck engine, 2) converted diesel engine, 3) stationary engine, depending on who you believe. In fact, the Guinness World record is held by a Volvo P1800 (I had one in the 80’s – way cool car) with a slightly smaller version of this engine and has over 2,000,000 miles. Impressive as that is, I have not seen any Volvo 240’s for sale around here with 400k on them – I have seen two 300D’s, one of which I bought. Maybe the engines keep on going, but the body gives out.

Now accelerating on the highway, I’ve got all kinds of power. It may be a lighter car than Strider, but it feels MUCH more sprightly. And what’s with the transmission shifts? I can’t feel them at normal speeds. This thing is SMOOTH. No jerking, no flaring, just shifts almost imperceptibly. And most 240 owners will tell you that the transmissions are nearly bulletproof (OK, except for the overdrive – somebody was on crack when they designed that). Now, at 60, the tight steering seems a bit too tight – there is a decided dead zone right at center. Not bad, but I prefer Strider’s even though there is a little play.

Now, I’m in the groove, cruise on. My left calf gets sore from being up against the door map pocket. Erggg! Stupid design. Strider has more room up front, but also has a smooth, rounded map pocket. And now, the worst part – NO ARM REST!. How can anyone design a car (costing around 20K new) without an armrest? And the DL trim level I have doesn’t give you an entry handle over the door to hang onto like the MB does. The entire car is quite a bit narrower than Strider, and feels more cramped. Decidedly less luxury.

Not a bad car on the highway, but I miss the smoothness (and noise of the engine) of the MB. I’ll be glad tomorrow when I can use Strider again.

Most 300D parts are quite reasonable, but Volvo must take the cake for cheap parts. EVERYBODY makes them. And because there were so many 240’s made, there is a huge stock of used parts. 240’s have electronic fuel injection, but the ECU can be had for $40 on Ebay ($1000 from the dealer). Oil changes are $7 vs $25. Wiper blades are $1.99. Catalytic converters are $75. Radiators, $99.

There is a pretty good forum for Volvos (brickboard.com) but not as good as this one. Either car has a huge fan club with people willing to help keep them running.

Strider sold for $33,000 in ’84 vs about $18,000 for my daughter’s 1984 Volvo, so there should be some differences. The Volvo rides and handles cheap. The interior is cheap. In fact, the cars are cheap (and plentiful). There are always a few on Craigslist. A nice one can be had for $1000. With a working AC. A comparable MB would go for $2500-$3000.

Then there is the fuel. The Volvo uses $2.19 regular vs. $2.49 diesel (if I used diesel). But I’m only getting 26 mpg on the Volvo whereas I get 28-30 on Strider. About evens out.

But maybe the biggest difference is that when you are driving down the road in a Volvo 240, you are just another schmuck. As you tool down the highway in an MB, that three-pointed star is always there, telling you that you have a special car. And it feels like it.

phidauex · #2 12-15-2005, 05:32 PM

A buddy of mine is in a '240' family. They've got at least three of them. Two are nearly identical in every way, and one is a little older and more beat up. They seem like good reliable cars, they never seem to have major trouble with them, and put a lot of miles on them.

I wouldn't trade in my MB, but it seems those Volvos were built with some of the same ethic, a decent car that will run for a LONG time, still worlds ahead of most other makes from that time period.

peace,
sam

t walgamuth · #3 12-15-2005, 06:34 PM

swore by his volvos. he had five i think. having worked at studies in so bend he drove them til they became unobtainable, then switched to mopar specialy slant sixes. when his volare rusted out the front fender in 2 years he switched to volvo, and stuck with them til the end. i sold his beloved 91 wagon for my mom a couple of months ago. it was a sweet little car and the folks who got it seemed delighted.

they are nice cars but not for me. the electrics did it for me. i had a 76 and never again.

tom w

#4 12-15-2005, 06:58 PM

I have been a Volvo man for many years, say 32 years....my brother was a Volvo Indy for those 32 years and I have only owned an MB, 4 of them, from only over the past 5 years.....

The B-230, 4 cylinder engine, with ot without turbo, is in my opinion classified as bullet-proof! The Asian-Warner transmissions, also bullet-proof, are a hard act to follow, for any car maker. Look, there are still many on the road!

In my opinion, the two best automobiles ever produced in this world are the VOLVO and the MERCEDES-BENZ..............bmw, audi, volks-wagon, saab-real junk...stand OK next to JAPAN.......but ricers last longer!

Later 5 cylinder volvo's loose oil.....and are not what Volvo is, or was, now (Fo-Mo-Co) Saab (GM)....go figure!

stevelewis · #5 12-15-2005, 07:12 PM

I also own volvos and the 90 a 740 ti has 328,000 miles and my other a 89 760 ti has 211,000, but I like my 83sd better steve

Austin85 · #6 12-15-2005, 10:52 PM

My last car before the M-B was an 89 Volvo 740GL, the wagon....
It was a very comfortable ride, and a bit wider than the 240s.
I do miss it. I gave it to the indy at the Mobil station when it blew a rod and he hasn't changed out an engine yet, so I can still visit her there in back of the Mobil station on SR 7.

ONe thing for sure the VOlvo was way more expensive to maintain than the M-B I have now. I am due for a road trip up to Orlando soon.

AJW · #7 12-15-2005, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tenknots

I spend a lot of seat time commuting 130 miles a day and really get to know a car well. I’ve driven Strider over 10,000 miles in the last 3 months or so exclusively, and have come to appreciate him immensely. But for two days, I’ve driven our spare car, a 1987 Volvo 240. The reason is that Strider runs on a wvo/rug blend which is still experimental – I don’t really know at what point the fuel may gel and leave me stranded – so far 29F has been fine. But for the last two days, I’ve had some meetings at work that CAN’T be missed, so I took the Volvo.

Exploring the two car’s personalities was interesting to me – and I expect there are a few MB owners who also have the venerable Volvo 240. Here’s my take:

5:00 am. It’s cold – about 19F. I slip into the Volvo and the first thing I notice is the seats. They’re narrower than a 300D, but firmer. Without springs to sag and break, this 18 year old car still has comfortable seats. The seats are heated and have no perceptible wear. I stick the key in, turn it, and instantly it starts and settles down to a smooth even idle. No waiting, no feathering the throttle, just go. I turn on the headlights and I’m shocked by the brightness of instrument panel. My daughter has a 1984 Volvo 240 – the same age as Strider – and the dash lights are plenty bright. Who was on vacation the day they were designing 300D dash lights?

As I back out of the long driveway, I notice the wheel is several sizes too small – it’s almost comical compared to the substantial wheel on the 300D. But the turning radius of the Volvo is tighter than any car I’ve ever driven. And the steering is TIGHT. Rack and pinion rocks – the feel is great and there is no looseness, though Volvo people will tell you that the steering rack is prone to failure and good ones are not cheap. Driving down the dirt road it feels like Volvo replaced the shocks with rebar- bonejarring! Where is that controlled firm suppleness the MB has? As I bounce down the road, I notice the head lights are much better than Strider. This is the model with the headlights that have been less-than-favorably compared to a TV – they’re huge and funny-looking. But they are bright. After the stop sign on the top of the hill, I am thrown back on my seat when I hit the go pedal the same as I would in Strider. Very little movement of the pedal translates to LOTS of power – more than even my wife’s ALDA-massaged 300SD could dream of. Instant and lots of power (relatively speaking). As I bounce uncomfortably down the road, I notice lots of small dashboard rattles. The Volvo dash is made from hard plastic, rather than the smooth, softer stuff in the MB. It rattles. Strider can go down the same road with nary a rattle or squeak (this Volvo has 140k vs, 410k on Strider). Now, I’m not so sure it’s rebar in the shocks – I think someone in Sweden got a good deal on cement truck suspension springs and put them in 240’s.

Volvos are designed for cold weather (they are Swedish after all) and their heaters are said to be first rate. It’s true the heater comes on about two minutes before Strider’s does, but at the price of a fan that sounds like what happens when you put your head out the car window at 100 mph. Even on low, it’s noticeable. And I’ll be danged if I don’t have to TELL it to turn down the fan and adjust the heat with MY OWN HANDS. Strider knows what I like and takes care of it for me. And in truth, aside from getting heat a couple of minutes sooner, the heater is no better than Strider’s.

Stopping at the first light, I notice the brake pedal is spongier than Strider’s, though that might mean some air in the brake lines. No surprise, if you’ve ever had to bleed a 240’s brakes. Volvo has a parallel system that allow 3 wheels to have brake power if any one system fails. But to do that requires a brake bleeding scheme that requires an engineering degree. It just doesn’t get done. But the brakes are really good when pushed – all four wheels have discs like the MB and they work at least as well. At the stop light, I keep thinking the engine has died. Instead of a comforting I-can-do-this-for-ever clatter, I get a barely perceptible vibration. The 4-cyliner engine has been around forever and is so durable because it’s a 1) truck engine, 2) converted diesel engine, 3) stationary engine, depending on who you believe. In fact, the Guinness World record is held by a Volvo P1800 (I had one in the 80’s – way cool car) with a slightly smaller version of this engine and has over 2,000,000 miles. Impressive as that is, I have not seen any Volvo 240’s for sale around here with 400k on them – I have seen two 300D’s, one of which I bought. Maybe the engines keep on going, but the body gives out.

Now accelerating on the highway, I’ve got all kinds of power. It may be a lighter car than Strider, but it feels MUCH more sprightly. And what’s with the transmission shifts? I can’t feel them at normal speeds. This thing is SMOOTH. No jerking, no flaring, just shifts almost imperceptibly. And most 240 owners will tell you that the transmissions are nearly bulletproof (OK, except for the overdrive – somebody was on crack when they designed that). Now, at 60, the tight steering seems a bit too tight – there is a decided dead zone right at center. Not bad, but I prefer Strider’s even though there is a little play.

Now, I’m in the groove, cruise on. My left calf gets sore from being up against the door map pocket. Erggg! Stupid design. Strider has more room up front, but also has a smooth, rounded map pocket. And now, the worst part – NO ARM REST!. How can anyone design a car (costing around 20K new) without an armrest? And the DL trim level I have doesn’t give you an entry handle over the door to hang onto like the MB does. The entire car is quite a bit narrower than Strider, and feels more cramped. Decidedly less luxury.

Not a bad car on the highway, but I miss the smoothness (and noise of the engine) of the MB. I’ll be glad tomorrow when I can use Strider again.

Most 300D parts are quite reasonable, but Volvo must take the cake for cheap parts. EVERYBODY makes them. And because there were so many 240’s made, there is a huge stock of used parts. 240’s have electronic fuel injection, but the ECU can be had for $40 on Ebay ($1000 from the dealer). Oil changes are $7 vs $25. Wiper blades are $1.99. Catalytic converters are $75. Radiators, $99.

There is a pretty good forum for Volvos (brickboard.com) but not as good as this one. Either car has a huge fan club with people willing to help keep them running.

Strider sold for $33,000 in ’84 vs about $18,000 for my daughter’s 1984 Volvo, so there should be some differences. The Volvo rides and handles cheap. The interior is cheap. In fact, the cars are cheap (and plentiful). There are always a few on Craigslist. A nice one can be had for $1000. With a working AC. A comparable MB would go for $2500-$3000.

Then there is the fuel. The Volvo uses $2.19 regular vs. $2.49 diesel (if I used diesel). But I’m only getting 26 mpg on the Volvo whereas I get 28-30 on Strider. About evens out.

But maybe the biggest difference is that when you are driving down the road in a Volvo 240, you are just another schmuck. As you tool down the highway in an MB, that three-pointed star is always there, telling you that you have a special car. And it feels like it.

I have owned a 71 164, 77 242DL, 84 244GLE (canadian version), 79 245DL, and my personal favorite, a smurf blue 85 765 Turbodiesel (sold before it imploded, it wasn't a good engine) The last of these was owned in 1991 (the 242), and Volvo's are great for comfortable seats, rapid heat, safety, 3 point belts, disc brakes, etc, no matter how old (if you stop at the mid 1960's) The 87 240 was a good car, if somewhat long in the tooth, but the seats become rock hard, the headlight lenses are opaque with age, and the suspension leaves a lot to be desired, as does the automatic. That being the case, the car has a legion of fans. The B23 is well built, but it's direct predecessor the B21 is even better, particularly with a 4 speed and no power steering. Very spritely, and the steering wheel is the size of a bus.

Nostalgia has driven me to recently buy a 73 1800ES. Hope I can deal with the rust. My 91 W124 300D is a much better car then the 91 Volvo's, which is the only fair comparison, but it should have been better for the $$$

Things to beware on the Volvo are the 240 bad heater fan(6 hours labor), the bad rack and pinion, and anything with a V-6 or diesel. 4 cylinders last forever, everything else wears at the normal rate!

#8 12-16-2005, 01:33 AM

Very interesting comparison...indeed.

As far as rack an pinion steering...BMW, Benz, etc. didn't use it for a reason...

If your commute to work included triple digits or the high 90's...you'd be LOVIN' your steering box

Mine feels wonderful at high speeds...enought that I am deliberating NOT replacing my slightly worn steering box (w126 body 300SD).

I cannot stand plastic dash creaking/groaning/popping noises...drives me up the fricken' wall.

I love the way my 5 cylinder sounds, feels, idles, emits exhaust, screams under boost, all that good stuff.

Sometimes ya just drive around without the radio on...listening to the engine...lack of power steering noise/tranny noise...and just enjoy the smooth engine.

Go figure...almost 300k

JEdwards · #9 06-11-2007, 11:46 PM

I'm actually migrating to an MB 300E from my 89 Volvo 240 - I must say, I drove a few of the newer 850's and the 240 still had a better ride than them all, but everything you are saying about the creaking and the noises from the dash is correct, and the "cheapness", but in the end, it works. My 240 has 324k mi on it and when i fix the radiator for my sister (who will inherit the volvo), it will go for another couple thousand. The heaters are outrageous, and they have 2 settings.... off or gateway to hell. But, all in all, for a car that originally cost me $250 then another $1250 to get it up to spec, its a damn good buy, and ridiculously reliable.

E320wagon'94 · #10 06-12-2007, 12:22 AM

My mom took a 240DL wagon into a telephone pole back in NH at 40 MPH when I was five. We had the 240DL and a 300D at the same time growing up. The 240 felt safe (cracked the telephone pole, worst injury was my bloody nose from hitting the seat in front of me.) The 240 seemed great, but the 300D seems like it was milled from a solid block in comparison. Just figured I'd chime in.
-Zach

Ara T. · #11 06-12-2007, 12:24 AM

Volvo 240 should have less HP and torque than the 300D Turbo (if it's the naturally aspirated one... isnt it?) Though it's a lot lighter.

A friend of mine has a red Turbo 240 wagon and it's pretty dern zippy.

After I changed to a smaller steering wheel on my 300D it made it as tight as any rack and pinion unit too, if you want to look into that.

AndrewJ · #12 06-12-2007, 01:33 AM

My first car was a 240, my parents still have two of them, I migrated to a completely worthless 960 wagon after a love affair with a black cherry Jeep Grand Wagoneer. 240s are great, economical, and only mildly frustrating to work on, but they are just really cramped to me. I am not a big guy by any means, but I can never seem to get to my wallet when its in my pocket and the optional armrest must be stowed away before shifting the gears. They are just kinda uncomfortable in my opinion. My 960 is very comfortable, but the door panels can only fall off so many times before I get thoroughly pissed with it. One panel falls off one time and jams the door shut, shame on me. The same door panel falls off five or six different times spanning over three sets of door panels, then that one stays on and two different ones fall off, then I am going to through-bolt those delaminating fiber board pieces of **** into the sheet metal. Damn I hate that car...with a passion. I did see a 142 today that I might have to go back an check out. Dont get me started on 1800s, those things are pretty.

mowoc · #13 06-12-2007, 11:17 AM

FWIW I have owned both the 1987 240 GL and a 1986 300 SDL. I inherited the 240 in a divorice. It was probably the best thing I got out of that marriage.

I drove that thing all over the country. It was a tank with a trunk the size of parking lot. You could fit all kinds of stuff in that car and keep going. I agree with the front seat comment; they were narrow and the lack of an armrest was a PITA.

I have no idea how many miles were on it, the odometer quit working at 100k 6 years before I got it. I got rid of the 240 4 years ago due to a move. I sold it to someone who proceeded to destroy it, dang it.

I do miss that car, but I love the Mercedes. I echo the other comments about the feel and comfort of the MB over the Volvo. I would take the 240 in a pinch though.

JimmyL · #14 06-12-2007, 11:23 AM

I had an '83 240GL wagon and just loved that slow little square turtle. The dash did squeak a little, but they sure don't seem to crack as bad as MB dashes. 240's are good little starter cars for kids I think, and the AC works better than our w123's. The seats aren't very wide, but I love the cloth, and it holds up pretty well. The no-armrest thing is frustrating..... Oh, and you can find a 5 speed much easier!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode