talk me out of an 85 300sd, please - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

iNeon · #1 01-29-2006, 04:25 PM

i am fixing to go look at a 300sd, i will carry the camera and take as good of images as i can.

the car is black on tan, 1985 model, high miles is all it says, but that doesnt scare me. all the electrical goodies are what do that.

so beyond the extra room, options and extra power, what does a 300sd do better than a 1979 240d? the car is moderately priced, but it is also sitting on a car lot, so that means a moderate price in this case, will most likely mean a car that needs half a dozen repairs..

are the sd's more comfortable? the parts(i know there are MORE of them...) should be reasonably priced the same as they are for a 240, right?

so what i am saying is... there isnt room for a pair of diesels, an ovary on wheels and a vw, one would have to go for me to pick this one up. they could overlap for a bit if needed, though.

will i be asking for trouble by replacing a w123 with a w126? come out even based on some aspect of the 126 that i dont know about yet?

images in a few hours

TheDon · #2 01-29-2006, 04:27 PM

i wish i had gotten an SD ... so much bigger..and cool looking.. and comfy

mbzkid · #3 01-29-2006, 04:32 PM

Did all 85 SD's use the 617?

TheDon · #4 01-29-2006, 04:35 PM

i belive so.. wikipedia shows the SD had the 617 .. check my posting on it

Hatterasguy · #5 01-29-2006, 04:39 PM

I am now W123 expert but W126's seem as cheap and simple to fix.

If its in a good shape it will be a fun ride. The 85's had slightly higher gearing that brought the rpm down a bit on the highway.

They are an awsome around town car as well.

bgkast · #6 01-29-2006, 05:35 PM

Sell the ovary! Go with a entirely German car fleet!

biopete · #7 01-31-2006, 12:33 AM

I have the exact same question as iNeon. Should I sell my now working well 81 300D NA and get a 300SD ? I'm getting pretty comfortable with the 300D NA.
But I am not sure it will do the job as well as an SD.

The job is family camping vacation car and my daily driver. I want to pull a folding camping trailer. I have a 2 and 4 year old boys.

I'm really happy with the 300D NA. It is plenty comfy and powerful and roomy, especially compared to the Jetta we were in. I am also getting comfortable with it mechanically. Honestly looking under hood of a Turbodiesel is a little scary compared to the NA.

Will the SD do a significantly better job at being family car so that it warrants any extra maintainance and work and $$$? Does the net gain in joy far outweigh the net gain in work to own the SD?

DieselCJ · #8 01-31-2006, 12:38 AM

I personally like smaller vehicles; 90% of the time I am driving around alone, 8% with one passenger, and 2% with 3.

vwbuge · #9 01-31-2006, 12:46 AM

Before my '85 300SD I had a '79 300D (na). The 300D was a good car and handled well. Not much on the power although it did have well over 300,000 miles on it. When I bought the '85 it was like a new world. LOTS more power and more room. The parts are about the same as far as availability and price. Don't be afraid of the turbo. It is a beautiful thing.

Remember, '85 was the best year for the SD.

RobTheMod · #10 01-31-2006, 02:11 AM

I have never owned a 300D, but I've worked on several and driven several more.

I've loved driving my 300SD (first Benz) for almost a year.

My take on the subject: The 300SD has (perceived) more complexity than the 123 617t. In fact, comparing a late 300D turbo, the SD has power seats, and beyond that, there isn't anything else anyone can name. The 126 SD also has an electric vac pump in the trunk to run the central locking, so it can be argued that in this case, extra complexity adds reliability (it can't keep the engine from shutting off if a lock actuator fails). So I don't think you lose anything by going to an SD except compactness (if this is important to you).

The SD is worth the effort, IMO. An anecdotal back-up for my stance on the issue: I have two acquaintances who own 300Dt's. Both have 300k miles but are in astounding condition. Both of these guys would only part with their beloved 123s TO GET a 126 300SD. It's the only car they're interested in as an upgrade. Whereas I have (sorry, 300D fans) no real hankering to sell my SD to buy a 123.

300SD: More room, more quiet, bigger trunk, similar MPG, as compared to a 123. If none of these are important factors to you, stick with the 123. I know which I'd choose, and I've been 100% satisfied with my choice.

greasybenz · #11 01-31-2006, 02:46 AM

I love the amount of room in my 300SD. im pretty tall about 6' and i have to put the seat all the way back to get a good stretch and when i have the seat that way with a buddy behind me they like that its very roomy. I know the w123 is alot smaller so room can get cramped if i was to have the seat all the way back with a buddy behind me.

Since it is an older diesel its much more loud then say my mom's TDI but Mercedes did a good job not letting in the sound of the engine in the car. Its pretty muffled down and i like that about the car. My dad loved the amount of speed and power in my car being that its a older and heavier diesel car but it will get you around pretty quickly compared to a 240D. I still want more power but thats just because im a teen

Hit Man X · #12 01-31-2006, 03:37 AM

'85s are the best.

They do have the 2.88:1 gearing as said, better trans system (blue UFO), and sadly have previous year CA emission. Even so, I've been getting 29-31mpg often in my SD. I typically cruise around 63-67mph on the freeway (hey, I've got no one to see or go home to, so I'm never in a rush when out and about).

I had an '84 300D prior to picking up this SD and I like the SD far better than the D. More room sure (as much as a SWB can give you, but that's why I have the SDL too), but the SD looks better to me also. Better interior bits, power seats, electric vac system, etc. I don't think the SD is that much heavier than a 300D either, my SDL is around 3800lbs so the SD has to be around 3600lbs I'd guess.

biopete · #13 01-31-2006, 10:34 AM

Thanks all. This is pretty much what i thought cause i see 'SD' and 'love' a lot in the same thread it seems. Why is the 85 so much better than others ?

Also , i'm guessing the Turbo charged engine would do a better job pulling a trailer and it would hold up better to the extra stress. ??

ConnClark · #14 01-31-2006, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by biopete

Thanks all. This is pretty much what i thought cause i see 'SD' and 'love' a lot in the same thread it seems. Why is the 85 so much better than others ?

Its the last of the OM617's

Quote:

Originally Posted by biopete

Also , i'm guessing the Turbo charged engine would do a better job pulling a trailer and it would hold up better to the extra stress. ??

hmmmm... I don't Think I would pull a trailer...

Hit Man X · #15 01-31-2006, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by biopete

Thanks all. This is pretty much what i thought cause i see 'SD' and 'love' a lot in the same thread it seems. Why is the 85 so much better than others ?

Also , i'm guessing the Turbo charged engine would do a better job pulling a trailer and it would hold up better to the extra stress. ??

Biggest reasons are the taller axle gears and better transmission system. I'd still take an earlier one too, the axle is an easy swap to a taller ratio if you like.

I too wouldn't recommend towing with it, the vehicle doesn't make a lot of torque to do this. It's 170tq stock only...

Best inexpensive quality tow rig would be an older Ford F150 with a 4.9L I6 and an M5OD manual. '87-95, the '87-'91 bodies are vevy inexpensive.