Reality check for Diesel 123 owners - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Hatterasguy · #31 11-18-2007, 10:59 AM

I'm probably going to get something thats gas next. I want something that starts better in the winter, and modern gas cars IE model year 2000 and newer get similer or better mileage to any of ours.

An E430 for example should get very similer mileage to my SDL, yet has twice the power.

#32 11-18-2007, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

I'm probably going to get something thats gas next.

About the only gasser sedan that would interest me is a W109 6.3.

BIGRED · #33 11-18-2007, 11:37 AM

My experience with gas engined performance cars that purport to get high mileage is that you "can" get really good mileage but you must be very careful how you drive it.

I had a Vette that could get into the mid 20's, but in the real world day to day driving I averaged maybe 15 to 16.

We now have a 530it and can get low to mid 20's in it or if I drive it hard and fast, I can take is down to 12 in a heartbeat.

It seems that if I drive the diesel hard, it will impact mileage but not as significantly as gas engines.

Bama1 · #34 11-18-2007, 12:28 PM

Lets see...
Purchase price new $29,976.18 + repairs 4280.00 = 34256.18
34256.18 divided by 357,648 = .096 per mile (And declining)
No, I long ago stopped calculating fuel mileage...

Plus, no more capital "investment" or interest cost or concern for depreciation after the first four of twenty-six years.

Other reasons are Easy DIY repairs, easier DIY maintenance for consumables, known part behavior and lifetime expectations. You will not have that on the disposable cars, cause they simply are not engineered for longevity or designed for sub-system R&R maintainability...

Where are you buying your fuel? We are at 2.65-2.75 gallon. I suggest you get away from the carriage-trade high-dollar locations and try a truck stop or BP...someplace where they pump higher volume of fuel will be cheaper than the local gas-station/merchandise mart .

My next ride is likely to be a Bluetec CDI if it is okay with the Boss...
You gotta test drive one of those...man they are really sumthin!

thesst · #35 11-18-2007, 12:30 PM

I drive a Mercedes because it's comfortable and classy. If I wanted to be like every other annoying kid my age, I'd get a lame-ass "suped-up" Honda or Acura that will last maybe 150K miles before it needs a MAJOR surgury to stay on the road.

Plus, when I can't afford the fuel, I just ride my 115 MPG diesel motorcycle...

pawoSD · #36 11-18-2007, 01:30 PM

It is indeed VERY easy to kill the MPG's on a gasser. Hatterasguy, would you reeeally be able to resist that 430 engine, and feather the throttle all the time? I couldn't, I'd be zipping around like crazy, with my wallet on fire from the cost. So I'll stick with a diesel. Someday a CDI would be a neat thing to have, that is some power.

I drove our minivan for a week once when my car was down waiting for a part, and I drove it fast and hard all week, and got....*drumroll........ 11.7 MPG.

I used an ENTIRE 20 gallon tank of fuel in ONE week....driving only a couple hundred miles! That thing normally gets about 18-20mpg if you drive "normally". So that shows how thirsty a gasser can really get. I drive my diesel like I drove the van, and I still get at least 19.5+ mpg. Usually about 22-23.

dmorrison · #37 11-18-2007, 01:50 PM

Lets see. Currently 3 W123's in the family and diesel at $3.45 a gallon verses $2.89 for regular. The W123's get around 24-25 MPG city. The Honda uses regular and gets 24-25 MPG in town. 30-31 MPG highway. So $0.55 a gallon difference. At 15,000 mile a year times the difference is a bout $330 a year more for diesel than the Honda.

Did I mention a $405 a month car payment for the Honda.

We drive them because they are unique and very solid. Are they safer than a new Honda. No. The advances in the Honda far out pace the late 70's technology of the W123. But I still like the W123's. Easy to work on plus I really know them since I have owned 5 of them.

So I will keep driving them until they can't drive. But the Honda will be a daily driver for some time.

Dave

#38 11-18-2007, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmorrison

At 15,000 mile a year times the difference is a bout $330 a year more for diesel than the Honda.

That's the point, the cost difference due to fuel is negligible so there is no point worrying about it. My total fuel cost for the year is probably less than $5500 (based on about 40K miles). Certainly not enough expense to consider driving an econo-box that would cost more than that in first year depreciation.

SW · #39 11-18-2007, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmorrison

Did I mention a $405 a month car payment for the Honda.

$405/ month will buy lots of diesel fuel.

pawoSD · #40 11-18-2007, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SW

$405/ month will buy lots of diesel fuel.

Yep, about 115 gallons at our local price. Thats a lot of driving! Probably about 2800 miles!

dynamitejacket · #41 11-18-2007, 02:33 PM

its probably just the conspiracy loving survivalist in me, but the fact that my benz was made to last, and to be rebuilt, puts it leagues above any modern car, including my 40 mpg TDI. thing is, all the manufacturers are chasing the old "more and faster" ideal. that is: more profit, and faster turnover. Back when the 123s were built, the profit motive was there, but they had not yet fully embraced the idea that forcing you to buy a new car every 3-5 years would maximize profit.
We have the technology available to make a car that gets amazing mileage, and lasts a long time. it would be amazingly expensive at first- but after the sale the dealer might not see you for 25 years or more. thats a lot of lost revenue.

one the other hand, i think cheap, throwaway cars that last 5 years and get great mileage would be ideal if we did away with actually having to own the car. Imagine if you walked into your honda dealer and signed up for a 200 dollar per month open ended lease. At five years, honda takes your old car, grinds it up to make the next batch of disposable cars, and furnishes you with a brand new one for the next five years...

i know, crazytalk

Angel · #42 11-18-2007, 03:42 PM

I drive a 1982 240D because my wife and I don't have the money for me to buy a different car - the 240D is paid for, gets acceptable fuel economy (I get from 24 to 28 depending on how I beat it...), holds a car seat for my son (unlike the Miata I'd love to drive) and I've been able to not spend a lot of money on it at all.
This doesn't seem to be the prevailing thought here, becuase by my logic, if I still had my old broken VW Corrado I'd be driving it, doing as little as possible.

Oh the other thing I realized is that right now, I know my way around W123's. I also know my way around a MK1 and MK2 VW - but the MBZ's have a lot fewer design problems.... This Hysteresis makes it tough to jump ship across brands to one that I'm not familiar with - because me fixing my car is a given.

Right now, for me, the 240D is the cheapest form of transportation for me. Don't like Diesel prices ? wait a few weeks - they'll change =)

-John

lietuviai · #43 11-18-2007, 04:18 PM

I have a gasser 123 and it gets better mpgs than the 300D I had. It's only a 4 cylinder but has more hp than the diesel. Mile per mile it has been cheaper to drive than the diesel. It only needs 5 qt oil changes and the filters are cheaper by about 1/2 what the diesel filters cost. Oh yes no need for the more expensive diesel oil either. It has spark plugs but they seem to last as long as glow plugs and are cheaper and easier to replace. It does have a manual transmission so it'll shift as smooth as you want it to plus its more fun to drive. I haven't had any electrical issues mainly since there aren't many electrical accessories. The A/C is manual so it has no issues to fear. No power windows, no cruise control and no sunroof. This is what a Mercedes should be but too bad this car not offered for sale in US. And parts are no problem nor more expensive to acquire than those for the diesel. Many parts are even cheaper. And no cold starting problems either.

I still drive my Honda more though. I'm 6'3 and I'm comfortable in it. It gets me 40 mpgs on the hwy and low 30's around town. I bought it below wholesale when the car was only 6 mos old and had only 8400 miles. In now has nearly 30K miles and it has been trouble free. It's very cheap to maintain. I find everything I need below dealer cost on ebay. Based on other ownership experiences I've read on various Honda forums I should expect at least 300K miles without any major issues due to the way I drive and maintain my car.
I don't have a car payment either.

Hatterasguy · #44 11-18-2007, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig

About the only gasser sedan that would interest me is a W109 6.3.

Any 2005 or newer gas MB would work just fine for me, except the R.

Hatterasguy · #45 11-18-2007, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pawoSD

It is indeed VERY easy to kill the MPG's on a gasser. Hatterasguy, would you reeeally be able to resist that 430 engine, and feather the throttle all the time? I couldn't, I'd be zipping around like crazy, with my wallet on fire from the cost. So I'll stick with a diesel. Someday a CDI would be a neat thing to have, that is some power.

I drove our minivan for a week once when my car was down waiting for a part, and I drove it fast and hard all week, and got....*drumroll........ 11.7 MPG.

I used an ENTIRE 20 gallon tank of fuel in ONE week....driving only a couple hundred miles! That thing normally gets about 18-20mpg if you drive "normally". So that shows how thirsty a gasser can really get. I drive my diesel like I drove the van, and I still get at least 19.5+ mpg. Usually about 22-23.

Yes I drive fast cars all the time. I want a lazy torque drunk V8 to waft me around next.

When your paying for the gas you tend to keep the rpm's down.

I really want that CLK550 now that I have been driving it. I was offered to buy out the lease, but that would be to large of a monthly nugget. A 2007 CLK550 is a hot car, its hard not to look good in one.