best diesel for the wife? - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Jeremy5848 · #16 11-08-2006, 04:50 PM

I learned a new word today -- thought "Luthier" was a name, when in fact it's a vocation. (Just one of the many free services offered by MercedesShop!)

Anyway, a 602 would be a good choice, more modern than the 617, no valve adjustments, but still serviceable by the individual.

So far, we 617 owners have had few problems getting parts. How long will that last? Maybe it's time to start thinking about shifting a notch into the future?

Jeremy

#17 11-08-2006, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy5848

So far, we 617 owners have had few problems getting parts. How long will that last? Maybe it's time to start thinking about shifting a notch into the future?

Jeremy

I wouldn't worry about it, the dealers can still get parts back to the 50s. Junk parts may be a different issue.

Alberta Luthier · #18 11-08-2006, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by riethoven

I second the 300D 2.5. The 602 engine is more refined than the 617 and quieter too. It is also in the W124 body which is the first generation of non chrome trimmed Mercedes. They look modern but still have few electronics compared to anything modern. They are dependable but not too expensive to work on. One down side is the evaporator which is difficult to replace because you have to remove the dash first.

Changing the subject completely, I have an acoustic steel string guitar with a bow in the neck. Is that anything a typical woodworker can fix or should I only trust it to a luthier. By the way, I used to resaw guitar backs and sides for a group of spanish acoustic guitar makers in central florida.

I am going to do some research on these 602 engines, pros and cons. I really appreciate all this advice. I am assuming the evaporator is an air conditioning component and AC is an option that we seldom need in this neck of the woods

, so that may not be much of a concern.
Regarding the bow in your guitar neck, I will pm you, and be happy to advise you.
Alberta Luthier

Alberta Luthier · #19 11-08-2006, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy5848

I learned a new word today -- thought "Luthier" was a name, when in fact it's a vocation. (Just one of the many free services offered by MercedesShop!)

Anyway, a 602 would be a good choice, more modern than the 617, no valve adjustments, but still serviceable by the individual.

So far, we 617 owners have had few problems getting parts. How long will that last? Maybe it's time to start thinking about shifting a notch into the future?

Jeremy

A'vocation' or a curse...
A Luthier is a maker and repairer of wooden stringed instruments. It was probably originally, a maker/repairer of Lutes before guitars etc. Usually now it means either a maker of just violin family instruments or of just fretted stringed instruments but not usually both. Generally a person who repairs but doesn't build at all is a 'guitar tech'. I repair both but just build fretted instruments.

BUT Back to where we ought to be... I am hoping this 602 isn't the engine that is known for bending connecting rods, or wearing the bore oval, or for that matter warping heads. The tiny bit I know about MB diesels (might fit in a thimble) is just the 617, and I am just starting to learn about the others.
Thanx All,
Alberta Luthier

Jeremy5848 · #20 11-08-2006, 08:04 PM

There are two potential problems with the later engines. I know a little bit and others, more experienced, can fill in the blanks and correct my errors.

The six cylinder, 3 liter diesel engine (603) that was introduced in 1986 (although most of them were sold as 1987s) has an aluminum head. They were more prone to warp when overheated than the earlier cast iron head on the 617 engine. A change in the head design during production reduced this problem. There's a casting number on the head and the experts will tell you where it is and what the numbers mean -- which to avoid and which are the later versions.

The 3.5 liter later version of that engine is the infamous 'rod bender.' Apparently the bored-out engine had more power than the rods could take. I don't know if the factory offered replacement stronger rods or not.

Both of these later engines are quieter, smoother, considerably more powerful, and require less maintenance (hydraulic valve lifters, nothing to adjust) than the 5 cylinder engines. That is a relative statement, however, and doesn't mean the earlier engines aren't also good -- I have one and am shopping for another, after all.

I'm sure others will have much to say on this subject. In many ways it's a personal decision and, in the end, the decision may simply turn on which car shows up in your crosshairs at the right price and condition and with the color upholstry that the lady likes.

Jeremy

satyr · #21 11-08-2006, 10:25 PM

We bought our 2.0L 190d 4spd (greymarket) because we needed an inexpensive commuter. Well, it's been that (at least until I get the heater core replaced). The wife learned to drive a stick in it and she really likes the "little car." With handcrank windows and no power "nuthin" there's less to worry about- and it's about as simple as these cars ever were I suppose.

PS- A nice cd player with MP3 capability, and a subwoofer in the trunk helps too by the way....

Alberta Luthier · #22 11-08-2006, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy5848

There are two potential problems with the later engines. I know a little bit and others, more experienced, can fill in the blanks and correct my errors.

The six cylinder, 3 liter diesel engine (603) that was introduced in 1986 (although most of them were sold as 1987s) has an aluminum head. They were more prone to warp when overheated than the earlier cast iron head on the 617 engine. A change in the head design during production reduced this problem. There's a casting number on the head and the experts will tell you where it is and what the numbers mean -- which to avoid and which are the later versions.

The 3.5 liter later version of that engine is the infamous 'rod bender.' Apparently the bored-out engine had more power than the rods could take. I don't know if the factory offered replacement stronger rods or not.

Both of these later engines are quieter, smoother, considerably more powerful, and require less maintenance (hydraulic valve lifters, nothing to adjust) than the 5 cylinder engines. That is a relative statement, however, and doesn't mean the earlier engines aren't also good -- I have one and am shopping for another, after all.

I'm sure others will have much to say on this subject. In many ways it's a personal decision and, in the end, the decision may simply turn on which car shows up in your crosshairs at the right price and condition and with the color upholstry that the lady likes.

Jeremy

Sounds to me like I would take a chance on a 3.5 liter if I thought it had been well cared for. I do like more power now and then. AND I do generally get very high miles out of my vehicles, so I must be doing most things right.

I wonder what the 'final straw' is for those 3.5s that bend rods? Lugging? WOT at lower rpms? Some of them seem to go quite a ways so something must push them over that line???
Perhaps I might find a good one? But short of disassembly how would you know?

Of course I am letting my preference show and the thread is about my wiffy's next car.
You said:
"the decision may simply turn on which car shows up in your crosshairs at the right price and condition and with the color upholstry that the lady likes.
And you are probably right

Thanx All,
Alberta Luthier

Alberta Luthier · #23 11-08-2006, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by satyr

We bought our 2.0L 190d 4spd (greymarket) because we needed an inexpensive commuter. Well, it's been that (at least until I get the heater core replaced). The wife learned to drive a stick in it and she really likes the "little car." With handcrank windows and no power "nuthin" there's less to worry about- and it's about as simple as these cars ever were I suppose.

PS- A nice cd player with MP3 capability, and a subwoofer in the trunk helps too by the way....

Hi satyr,
Thanx for sharing your experiance with me/us. What year is it and what is it like for power? does it keep up with the freeway traffic etc??
Thanx Alberta Luthier

Hatterasguy · #24 11-08-2006, 11:32 PM

Whatever she likes. My mom knows nothing about cars but drove the SD for two months. She didn't like it and prefers her new Rav4 much more. Women usualy don't like these cars. I vote for a newist C class your budget allows if you want to stay with MB. If not buy a Toyota or Honda.

Alberta Luthier · #25 11-09-2006, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Whatever she likes. My mom knows nothing about cars but drove the SD for two months. She didn't like it and prefers her new Rav4 much more. Women usualy don't like these cars. I vote for a newist C class your budget allows if you want to stay with MB. If not buy a Toyota or Honda.

We got over 300k on the 86 corolla hachback that she had when I met her. Perhaps another toylet is the answer. While I'd really like to bring her and MB diesels together.... if & when she ran it out of fuel or worse oil.... it would hurt me

She never actually ran the toylet out of oil... completely.... but off the dip stick!! That was a tough car, finally died of roadsalt cancer, and clutch wear.
So maybe the next MB I'm sort of shopping for, is for me after all!!!~~

JWJ · #26 11-09-2006, 03:48 AM

My wife drives the '83 MB 300D. She had the '00 VW Golf TDI until she rear ended someone. (One of many accidents.)

With the Golf she was able to move the seat all the way forward putting herself resting on the steering wheel while driving. Very dangerous but she wouldn't stop doing it. She is 5'2".

The first time she drove the 300D she commented the seat wouldn't go forward anymore. I showed her that's as far as it goes (for safety reasons).

Now when she drives she has to be away from the steering wheel - arms extended. I've noticed a tremendous difference in her driving.

She has also mentioned the steering is not as tight as the Golf and that its not as peppy. All these differences make her pay attention more. Which is what the lack of was causing most of her accidents.

Alberta Luthier · #27 11-09-2006, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWJ

My wife drives the '83 MB 300D. She had the '00 VW Golf TDI until she rear ended someone. (One of many accidents.)

With the Golf she was able to move the seat all the way forward putting herself resting on the steering wheel while driving. Very dangerous but she wouldn't stop doing it. She is 5'2".

The first time she drove the 300D she commented the seat wouldn't go forward anymore. I showed her that's as far as it goes (for safety reasons).

Now when she drives she has to be away from the steering wheel - arms extended. I've noticed a tremendous difference in her driving.

She has also mentioned the steering is not as tight as the Golf and that its not as peppy. All these differences make her pay attention more. Which is what the lack of was causing most of her accidents.

I do have to give my wiffy credit where it is due. I don't think either of us has had an accident in 20 or 25 years. But I know exactly how you feel when a loved and respected family member drives, well, poorly. My old dad has just passed away and hadn't driven for years but he drove Waaaaaay to slow for waaaaaay too long. Folks would be cruising on the almost empty highway and half way around a curve there he would be puttin along at about 40-45mph

in his 89 Caprice Classic.
So back on topic:

Does the 300d have two different handles to adjust front to back? My 300cd does and I haven't quite firured out the differance which does what? (I'm 6'2")
Alberta Luthier

Jeremy5848 · #28 11-09-2006, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alberta Luthier

Does the 300d have two different handles to adjust front to back? My 300cd does and I haven't quite firured out the differance which does what? (I'm 6'2")
Alberta Luthier

The handle at the right front of the lower part of the seat is for forward and back; the other one (on the side? don't remember) is for up and down. That track is slanted; the seat also moves forward and back a little -- the track is like a ramp.

Jeremy

BodhiBenz1987 · #29 11-09-2006, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterhardie

I am sure there are plenty of women diesel drivers out there, so it may just be that some women don't like the vibe.

My wife doesn't even want to consider the more modern ones, although I know they are much more refined.

Hey, some of us like the rumbling and rocking.

I'm a woman and I drive a 603 and a Jeep diesel, and my mom used to drive a 1987 GMC Suburban diesel ...

That baby was a monster, but she liked it. Scared some of the wimpy moms in the pick-up line at school, though.

300sdToronto · #30 11-09-2006, 11:17 AM

I'll probably get fired from the forum for suggesting this, but I'd also suggest looking at a VW Jetta or Passat diesel for your wife. Many women consider these "cute" - the only MB's my wife really thinks are cute are old 1970's gas 2 seaters or the new B series.

Parts are also - ahem - much easier to find and cheaper.