'92 300d 2.5 Turbo vs. '95 e300d (no turbo)
 

Looking into either of these 2.

Both seemed to be well mainatined.

'92 has 167k, '95 has 125k

'92 is about 3.5k cheaper.

Question: will I miss the turbo? In talking to a tech, seems like sans turbo is simplier and has less that could go wrong.

Pros - cons, one way or another?

THANKS.

Get the '95
 

I think we were talking, what, 50k miles less on the '95, it's 3 years newer, and the '95 was probably the best (from what I heard) MB diesel ever made. As a bonus, I think it even gives 1 mpg extra.

The final kicker, is that most cars depreciate $1,000 per model year, up to a certain point. For example, I bought an '88 Toyota Camry a while back. GREAT car! Bought it for $800. That's about as low as a decent running car can go.

But if you keep either car and have it for 3 years, chances are, you'll get $3,500 extra or whatever the difference was, at the end of your journey.

End of story, get the '95.

jeff 1991 300d, 95k

'95 is going to be smoother, a six cylinder is naturally balanced.

thank you + one more thing
 

I am looking into running these on biodiesel.

Either b20 or in a perfect world b99.

Would this impact what car I should gravitate toward? is there a difference?

Where are you located?
That 2.5 liter turbo is an excellent engine. I've driven a 190D with 2.5 turbo power, and I loved it. Seems to be a well regarded power plant.
Sounds like you will do well either way.
When you decide and purchase one of them, you ought to let us know where the other one is. Somebody close might be interested...........

I'm in Austin
 

I'm in Austin. The '92 is in wimberly and the '95 is actually in chicago. I found it when I was there on a business trip this week.

My only concern is rust but I didn't notice any. The '95 is one owner from an elderly couple was service at the dealer it's whole life.

I'm most likely going to sell my '87 190d now.

how much for the 95?

9.5k
 

seems a little on the high side but it's been well taken care of and I've been looking for a while so I'm comfortable with it.

honestly i think ya just gotta pay whatever it is worth to you. Just for the record, I just bought my 92 2.5 turbo, and I absolutely love it. decent top end, but you wont win any drag races in it. Still, it is a solid machine. I also run bio through mine, it seems to actually like it better, kinda rough at idle with regular diesel. I run about 87% wvo. Good luck with whatever you get.

Do collect and filter your own WVO?
 

If so, that's awesome.

I'm not looking to win any races, just find a dependable car to get me around without using gasoline.

Again, turbo sounds great but as these suckers get older sounds like something that could POTENTIALLY go wrong, costly more $.

Glad to hear you love yours. Best of luck, enjoy!

yep, I collect enough form one location to be able to fuel my benz quite well. Guy who owns the place is great, he runs it through a screen to get the big chunks out, and then pours it into the 5 gallon cubies it originally comes in. I have a small processor next door (about 30 gallon) and I basically just filter it really good. In the winter months though I have to use more regular diesel. :(

As for the car, I get in it and just drive just to be drivin, thats how much I like this car. Flew out to Detroit to pick it up, drove it 450 miles home that night.

Well heck, you already are familiar with the 2.5 I guess.
I think a car from an elderly couple that always had dealership maintenance would be pretty attractive.
Too bad they don't want a lot less, so you could then sell your 190D cheap.....:D

id say screw both, get a 87 300D its a six banger and it has a turbo! :D

So which would the forum say is quicker- an '87 or a '98-'99?

Stopwatch say 98-99 regardless of what forum says :)

Sixto
93 300SD