Had an '83 533i, and it wasn't very good.

It was the only new car I've ever heard of that suffered complete brake failure.

In addition it arrived with traction-free TRX tires.

It had lots of body flex, BMW still catching up to Mercedes in this era.

But Mercedes was only diesels in this era, save for ridiculous cars like S or SL.

__________________
Kent Christensen
Albuquerque
'07 GL320CDI, '10 CL550. '01 Porsche Boxster
Two BMW motorcycles

What about the W123 280SE?

TRXs looked cool, but that odd metric size pretty much limited them to one run on a car. EVERY BMW I see in the parts yard here seems to have some later model wheel/tire combo on it.

I know someone who's Pop had an '80 300SD, he had a complete climate system shut down in a rain storm (can't see out of the glass).

My running BMW has zero interior rattles... It is a 7-series though.

MB built 280s, 230s, both gas powered...

__________________
I'm not a doctor, but I'll have a look.

'85 300SD 245k
'87 300SDL 251k
'90 300SEL 326k

Six others from BMW, GM, and Ford.

Liberty will not descend to a people; a people must raise themselves to liberty.[/IMG]

I had one, one of the best diesels of its time fast, great handling, draw back mine was 85 rust, rust, ac problems ,parts problems you can get them but wait and wait plus being unique cost more im from toronto canada and there was less then 20 here in ontario parts guy s would alwys give me funny look when I said 524td

MacPherson struts? Hydroboost brakes? Simple suspension? Are we talking about an Audi 5000 here?

To compare the 524td to a 124 body 300D you'll find the 524 to have a sloppy chassis, lots and lots of road noise and engine noise, harsh-unrefined feeling suspension, and sadly underpowered.

A good car, just not a Mercedes. It would be better to compare a 123body with the smaller engine to the 5-series BMW.

__________________

Gone to the dark side

- Jeff

babymog, have to disagree with you, 524td was the fastest diesel Ive owned till my 99e300d it beat any mercedes at that time hands down in speed ,smoked like a biatch on wot but was great loved the ride too! wasnt happy with handling of e300d till I changed shocks out to bilstiens couple of months ago only reason i got rid of it was rust rust and more rust grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, geuss what my 99e300d same friggin problem rust poping out trunk,fenders doors damm maddening some times gonna have to kick the wife to curb to make some money so I can buy CDI

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then, my side is with the '87 Mercedes' performance though, 123hp for the 190Dt and 143hp for the 300Dt with 0-55 of 9.5sec and 8.7sec (in original US trim w/ trap oxidizer)respectively seem significantly better than:

"According to DIN norms, BMW achieved a fuel consumption of just 33.1 mpg with this modern
turbo diesel. With a top speed of 112 mph and an acceleration of 13.5 seconds from 0 - 62 mph,..."

That sounds more like the performance of the SDL at 10.4seconds 0-55.

I don't know what top speed is for the cars, do know that it is in excess of 120mph on flat ground, that is where I usually let off in my tune-up runs, only have a 3-mile run available.

The Bimmer is a fine car, don't get me wrong, I've had a couple of gas bimmers and liked them fine when I was younger, ... in my early 20s I wouldn't have been seen in a hardtop M-B, they were for old people LOL.

And there's that 635csi my neighbor has been trying to sell for a couple of years, ... it's starting to tempt me for a winter restoration project. Great looking cars.

__________________

Gone to the dark side

- Jeff

They're easier to wrench on and rebuild the suspension. You have many perks, I'd take a 524TD over any Diesel 123 anyday. It's pretty obvious you don't have experience with them on the rebuilding end.

Not sure where, but I didn't compare the 5-series to the 124...

__________________
I'm not a doctor, but I'll have a look.

'85 300SD 245k
'87 300SDL 251k
'90 300SEL 326k

Six others from BMW, GM, and Ford.

Liberty will not descend to a people; a people must raise themselves to liberty.[/IMG]

Good point xman. My M-Bs only have 1/4million miles, so the suspensions aren't sloppy yet, don't need rebuilding. I've spent plenty of time in/under BMWs, mine and friends, from 3.0Csi to 740Il, know how to swing a wrench. Never had a 123 body, was driving a 3.0Csi and quattros back then. Considered an '85 300Td, but didn't care for the handling of the 123. Waited, and bought a 300TE 4matic in '92 instead (much better handling). Drove the 535 wagon, too noisy and harsh, lacked refinement. Friend of mine's car, he loved it (his previous car was a 300ZX).

Simple is certainly easier to fix, but the main reason for the success of the MacPherson Strut (I believe that MacPherson worked for GM) is the low cost, not the performance. Unfortunately it is an inferior suspension in performance and durability to a double-a-arm or more complex suspension, lacks flexibility in design, but the almighty dollar makes most of those decisions in all but the most exotic vehicles these days.

Struts did come on the 201, which pre-date the 524Td.

Sorry to compare the '85 BMW to the 124, guess comparing it to the '70s designed body is more appropriate, my bad. Silly me for liking Mercedes diesels and posting it on the Mercedes Diesel forum. Still, the 190Dt and especially the 603-powered 300Dt kicked butt, unless we want to eliminate them from your comparison. You didn't specify 123 or other when you originally claimed the 524Td's superiority over diesel Mercedes.

__________________

Gone to the dark side

- Jeff