1987 Mercedes 300TD, 240K Miles $10K+ - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Rich300TDMBZ · #1 07-10-2006, 03:56 PM

Lately, I see a sudden price spike for decent diesel wagons - especially the 1987 300TDs. This one is now $10K, with 7 days to go. I never thought a wagon with almost 240K miles can fetch that much! I do give the seller credit for good detailing and very good pictures. I suppose all you need in an auction are two bidders who want the same car bad to bid the price up - or in same cases one, with a shrill bidder.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Mercedes-Benz-300-Series-300TD-1987-W124-300TD-TURBO-DIESEL-STATION-WAGON-WARRANTY-FL_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6330QQihZ012QQitemZ220005390090QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

dieseldiehard · #2 07-10-2006, 04:14 PM

In good condition the wagons do bring a lot. Families want them. People with surfboards here want them, status deluxe! Don't forget the Bio-WVO fans what them too.

I would wonder about what (if any) repairs were done on the wagon. Without records I'd need a full checkup by a MB knowledeable ship b4 I plunked that much down!

If the transmission had been replaced with a new Peter Schmidt rebuild and the car had a new windshield and new lock tumblers and a new MB battery and AC that works, that is what I got for $2500 and it was a real nice '87 sedan, as nice or nicer than the one in the eBay ad

Yes luck happens sometimes, watch Craigslist and get lucky, eBay is a real gamble!

Let the buyer beware and look out for SHILL bidding, not shrill (Shrill is how loud you yell after taking posession of the car and discover its a POS!)
OTOH,

if people are paying near to $10K for a 300TD in the 123 chassis I don't see why they wouldn't pay that for the 124 chassis. Its a wagon thing. They are always in demand having been produced in lesser numbers.
The 124 sedan was sold for $38K, so what would the eagons sell for when released, $42K or more?
Today's $10K is less than it was in 1987.

Veloce300DT · #3 07-10-2006, 04:41 PM

As diehard said, the w124 300TD's are VERY desireable automobiles these days, and their current market values reflect that (esp. on the southern East Coast, South West, and West Coast where rust is less of a problem for older cars). $10K + for a w123/w124 wagon in ORIGINAL, IMMACULATE shape in every way doesnt seem too outrageous considering trends.

However, I have doubt that this 300TD that is listed is as nice as the seller states. This seller has listed numerous MB Diesels for sale in the past. They all share one obvious thing in common... perhaps even more under the hood;

Every car he has listed has been repainted. That doesnt necessarily mean anything bad... 15-20 yr old cars tend to have aged paint.. BUT the only reason why is because the finish has not been maintained. Or an accident.

If a car is regularly washed, detailed, and the paint recieves proper treatment throughout the duration of its life, it will no doubt look VERY good, if not close to new. This is extremely true of MB paints. Why would a WELL CARED for 15-20 year old MB need a paint job? and even more importantly, why is the quality of repaint so low?

I raise an eyebrow because it seems to me that the only reason why you would have an old MB re-finished with a low quality "maaco-like" paint job would be because the original finish was in HORRID shape... peeling, major oxidation, rust, acid rain, detrimental etching etc... only then would a below par repaint look relatively justifiable as an inexpensive "fix". Even more so when you make a living as a car flipper, trying to maximize profits by dressing a car up to look better than it actually is (esp. when you are a flipper trying to cash in on the latest MB Diesel craze- lots of MB diesels out there, and lots of em used up and not worth much- which works in the flippers favor- he can buy a car for cheap, throw on an $800 paint job, detail the interior, and jack the price sky high). Many people wont notice that the paint is not original, or of extremely low quality when compared to the original via the pictures in the listing.

If this 300TD needed to be painted in order for it to be "presentable" for sale, I highly doubt that the car was well cared for. And if the seller is covering up cosmetic issues with a hack paint job, what ELSE is hiding underneath the skin of the car?

It IS a clean car no doubt... exterior aside. The interior is in nice condition for the age and mileage of the car. But it is my advice that any buyer should be weary of the TRUE condition of the car. The paint on this one makes me think that the seller touting the car as "meticulously maintained" is a bit of a stretch.

pdxwaker · #4 07-10-2006, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Veloce300DT

If a car is regularly washed, detailed, and the paint recieves proper treatment throughout the duration of its life, it will no doubt look VERY good, if not close to new. This is extremely true of MB paints. Why would a WELL CARED for 15-20 year old MB need a paint job? and even more importantly, why is the quality of repaint so low?

In my experience the metalic finish paints (those with clear coats) have many more problems than those without clear coats.

your statement is likely true for non-clearcoat finishes... not sure I agree for clearcoats.

Boardmonger · #5 07-10-2006, 09:03 PM

That paint sucks. It is nice in how there are no scratches but it just isn't nearly as reflective as factory paint, just look at the roof and hood shots under the tree:

Besides that the 87 300td's are very nice cars, but I know you can find a better deal. One is on craigslist that isn't in running condition but is nice in and out for $1500. For the extra $8500 you can have a near perfect car without as much mystery.

Veloce300DT · #6 07-10-2006, 09:17 PM

pdxwaker-

I agree, the clearcoat metallics are more prone to flaws from UV damage... 80's MB metallics often times crackled, and would change in tone depending on sun exposure. However, if cared for properly I still think that these problems would be reduced to a minimum. I owned a Gold 300D, 1984. The paint was VERY uniform and nice. There was a spot the size of a quarter that had hazed, and there was some slight tone variance on the rr quarter panel, HOWEVER, it was otherwise in immaculate shape. The car had been kept impeccable by its original owner prior to my purchase. Lots of polish and waxing over the years paid off..

The paint on the 300TD subjected in this thread SUCKS as Boardmonger put it. There is an absolute absence of clean clear reflections... instead the car has a uniform finish that is extremely blurry... offering soft, dull reflections. NO original MB paint (wether it be non clear-coat, clear coat, or metallic) could EVER look like the paint on this car... an MB OE metallic w/clear coat (which this car would have been finished in if it was originally a metallic grey) would not dull to this level in such a uniform manner. It would more likely exhibit crackling/clear coat failure/oxidation on the hood/roof areas, and the sides and rear of the car probably would have held up better... if the car hadnt been cared for. Which is probably why the seller had it re-sprayed for sale

In direct sunlight you can see the metallic finish... which is shallow, dull and more flakey when compared to MB OE metallics.