Well, after moaning for months about how disappointed I am with the failure of the connecting rods in my 1991 350SD the dealer has responded by offering me a trade value that makes a 1998 E300D-Turbo with around 41,000 miles affordable.

I need another vehicle as my wife is turning in her C230 Kompressor at the end of the lease in December as well, and we may be picking up a 1985 300D with 200k miles. Looks like it is her turn to take the raw end of the deal here as she loves the C230, but it eats gas (she has a lead foot) and it is a little small for a family of three 6 ft, 2 plus males, a 5'8" female, and a 55 lbs. 3 year old male Samoyed. Two of the males were under 5'5" when the car was leased a few years ago and the dog was a mere handful of white fuzz.

Anyway, I was wondering if there is anything I should be examining these cars for before I buy them. They are both one owner vehicles and the 1998 E300D-Turbo is in nearly perfect condition. I have yet to examine the 1985 300D, but I have been assured it has been garaged and serviced meticulously. It is a car being "traded" if the dealer or the owner can find a buyer.

The underhood area of this car looks like it just came out of the factory, no oil leaks and no signs of grime or aging anywhere. I am a little sensitive about newer Mercedes since my experience with the 350SD, and really do not want to take a misstep here. I like to maintain my cars myself, and keep them for decades. This turned out to be impossible with the 350SD, and while the C230 seems very nice, it did not make me think of keeping it for decades without a lot of service by the dealer. Any hints about underlying weaknesses with the 1998 E300D-Turbo would be greatly appreciated before I buy the car. Thanks, Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

I know a few people with 98 and 99 E300 TurboDiesels, they are FAST cars but lack the quality of the 123 and 126 cars. The 85 300D is a real workhorse and will last nearly forever if you take care of it. I dont know if anyone knows how long the E300 engine will last since it's so new, but I havn't heard any complaints yet.

John

Turbodiesel,

Thanks for the input. I will be checking the 1985 300D tomorrow and will let you know how it looked. It is remarkably inexpensive so I expect I will buy it if there really is no rust as advertised. The salesman who is looking to make the deal is someone I have known for twenty years so I expect he wouldn't try to get me excited about a car he is going to show me if it is a lemon.

My real questions are with the newer car. I agree that Mercedes has succumbed to the pressure to make things less expensive to build, and therefore sell, in the name of competition. The net effect is that they now makes much less durable seats and other parts you routinely touch. I am more concerned with the car's guts, the power plant and drivetrain, suspension and steering gear. I do think the rustproofing of today is much better than the stuff of the previous generations, as are the "active" safety features like airbags, traction controls and assisted brakes. But I am also suspicious of the basic machine's longevity, reliability and availability.

Thanks for the help, anyone else know the 1998 E300D-Turbo?

Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

Well, I happen to know both cars extreemly well. I have an 85 300D and my father has what is probably the last turbo built for the American market, a 99! The 85 is a great car, but to keep it like new takes patience and money. The 99 is such a different car. The quality is astounding for a new car, but too plastic-like compaired to the 85. Ride wise, its different too. The 99 is such a fast car, you will be hard pressed to find a faster, more drivable and enjoyable open road car. The 85 is fast too, but in a different way. Its noisy, quirky, few women like them... But they have character. If you can put up with their crap, they're great. I call mine the "diaper patient." The 99 is a new car, very fast, quiet, you might as well buy a E430 and call it even! But you'll save on the fuel. The economy of the 99 makes the 85 look like a 62' Chevy 409 with dual Carters and a heavy foot. Good luck on the cars!

Randall,

Thanks for the input. I was wondering what kind of fuel economy the 1998 E300D-Turbo is supposed to get. I have read in these threads that people have gotten over 40 mpg, which I think is amazing for such a comfortable, well performing car.

I feel lucky when the 1982 240D gets over 28 mpg, which makes me wonder what the 1985 300D will get too. Thanks again, Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

The 99 has a tank range of 400-600 miles... Never really drove the car long enough to test. The car is my father's personal car, it doesn't get too much use and after it does, it can sit for weeks. I know you can go to Delaware and back on 1/2 tank! She has only 12,000 miles in 2.5 years.

The 85 is not bad for a 3500 pound car. Given its age, technology and condition, 30 mpg is possible. A big help is heat and Redline additive. The 85 has to work harder to maintain speed, so, its not as good as the 99. A lot depends on the tune of the 85 as well. With valves adjusted, an even foot and some good 45 cetane rate diesel, the car can get 450 miles to a tank, though I've heard of more.

Another thing you have to consider with the 85 is the valve train. The valves must be done every 10-15k. Depending on milage, you may need a timing chain, head gasket and the like. I had to do A LOT of work to get my car where it is today (and believe me, she still needs some more). May I suggest a newer diesel for the wife. The 123 can be a bit of a hairy machine under pressure, it isn't for everyone. The newer W124s, and W126s will offer more modern convenience for the dollar.

I drive a w123 for my own reasons. I love the looks, the noise, the vibe, and the chrome. Plus they are getting rare in good order. A well sorted 123 is VERY hard to find due to the age and cost. A newer 124 with 3.0 or 2.5 Turbo block is a more civilized car for the "little lady."

BTW, I know a great 87 SDL for sale, perfect car really... Let me know if interested.

Randall,

Thanks for the information. Sounds like the 1998 should be at least a slight improvement compared to the 1985, and 30 mpg for a 1985 300D-Turbo sounds pretty good.

My wife loved the 1982 240D and would only give it up to our daughter when I got her the C230 Kompressor. She rarely drives the 350SD as she thinks it is too big and bulky - she really likes the smaller size and good visibility of the W123. The main purpose of the 1985 300D is local transportation, you know, the MOM Taxi company, and taking the dog to the beach for walks along the Long Island Sound.

I hate to turn down a good car, but I am fairly certain my wife would be unhappy with an SD or SDL. But a number of people that read this thread might, so let us know something about it. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

BTW, how's that 350SD of yours?

Turbodiesel,

My 350SD is about as solid as one can be with 175,000 miles. The car is Taupe on the exterior, and cream leather on the inside. The only stuff on the inside that is a little ratty is the passenger side of the center console where the original owner had a phone screwed into the cream colored edging, and the repair is not 100% (maybe 95%, but not perfect), and the driver's side seat belt retracting slot, which has torn the cream colored plastic lining around the forward edge of the slot. There is a slight crease or beginning of a crack in the rear seat, but it has been there from the day we got the car (77,000 miles) and has not gotten any worse. I use Lexol leather care on the seats and doors and Lexol plastic stuff on the dash and other parts that are not leather.

The exterior is in pretty good shape, a couple of dings the size of peas here and there, no rust, no scratches. I am about to try this stuff from an outfit called Zainos Brothers on the exterior to deal with some clearcoat crazing I am getting and don't seem to be able to stop. But it really looks good.

The engine is as it should be with 13,000 miles since the rebuild. I am getting a little smoking and don't know where it comes from. When I run the car at idle, I can take the oil filler cap off and there is NOTHING happening in there in the way of blow by. I use Mobil 1 with the red cap on it all year long. It does not use a drop of oil (by the way I just bought one of the Shurflow Waterwolf oil changers, and it really works well), and I change it every 3-4,000 miles.

I don't know if you asked because you were interested in the car or what, but I am unconvinced the rebuilt engine is made of parts that are any more durable than the defective connecting rods it was built with originally. I have asked the service manager and have nothing but a kind of wimpy look of not comprehending my question, with a statement a few seconds later like "I think the new ones are beefier than the old ones" which does nothing to inspire confidence.

However, that said the car is otherwise well maintained and in very good working order. I was hoping to keep it for twenty years or so, until the engine died. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

I asked because I wondered if it was the original engine or not. I hear the rebuilt engines do have updated parts and are reliable, but who knows. Taupe is a GREAT color on the 126. Beautiful.

Best of luck with it,

John

I have an 85TD and a 84D-T and will post my 2 cents worth. Both cars have over 200K and are performing well. The TD gets about 26mpg and the DT gets about 28. The main components of both cars function well (i.e. the engine, compression, etc). What drives me crazy is the small stuff (vacuum hassles, door handles, etc). What amazes me is the lack of oil usage. Both engines are tight and have great compression. Coming from the Volvo diesel world, this has been an amazing discovery. With weather in the 30's lately in Michigan, the Volvo is plugged in but the MB's start without a sweat. Really enjoying them despite the small things which keep me busy.

diesel don

__________________
DAILY DRIVERS:
'84 300DT 298k (Aubrey's)
'99.5 Jetta TDI IV 251k (Julie's)
'97 Jetta TDI 127k (Amber's)
'97 Jetta TDI 186k (Matt's)
'96 Passat TDI 237k (Don's
'84 300D 211k Mint (Arne- Undergoing Greasecar Conversion)

SOLD:
'82 240D 229k (Matt's - Converted-300DT w/ 4 speed

Thanks for the inputs, and I will let you know how I make out. I will be checking the 1985 300D-T today. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

I have a 99 E00D with 55000 miles. I put all the milage on in about 18 months and then my job ended, so goes life. The car is great with plenty of power. Set the cruise at 75 and it will pull any hill on the freeway. The car gets 32 miles per gallon on the road and 27 in town. The car handles great and rides like a champ. I stayed at a motel one night without a plug and the car started just fine in 10 degree weather with out the block heater. I have had the car in below zero weather with the block heater and had no problems starting it. At 80 miles per hour if you stomp on the pedal it will put you back in the seat and take you right up to 100 in just a few seconds. The black puff of smoke out the back is also good for letting someone know they should not have cut you off.

Another night I got stuck in traffic and went no where for 3 or 4 hours. I ran the motor the whole time to keep warm and used very little fuel unlike my friend is his Lexus who had to turn his car off to keep from running out of gas.


The brakes are great and will stop the car on a dime.


Drawbacks. This car is very hard to find. To take delivery of this car I had to go to Memphis. I have had a lot of trouble with the climate control system. I have just replaced the evaporator and compressor 1500 miles out or warrenty and that hurt. Mercedes was not sympathetic to the breakdown. Other than that we love the car and plan to keep it a long time.

Jim,

Any chance of a Starmark warranty on E300d replacement?

Sixto
91 300SE
81 300SD

I personally would go for the '99 E300...........miles ahead in terms of driveablitiy and refinement over the '85....I have a good friend who has a '98 E 300 Turbodiesel and the quickness and refinement of this car are amazing....and the MPG is incredible too...probably 10 more MPG than the 85 model
some one above said something about the quality of the '85 being better...?........the '85 is a dinosaur compared to the '99....just in the safety features alone.....as I recall the '85 300D doesn't even have ABS!!........the '99 has ABS,6 airbags,ASR and ESP as an option.......so if you care just about safety at all that may influence your decision

just my opinion

Warren
1992 300SD 125K
Columbus Ohio
turner@greif.com