I think the attraction to the 617 to me and many others is the fact it is the last of the "old style" diesel engines (i.e all mechanical injection etc.)
It offers much smoother operation and great performance compared to the earlier 220's, 200, 190, and such, but still easy to work on. It was the
final evolution of the old engineering, before electro/ computer controls began taking over.

I dont think 617's longevity is any better than some of the earlier Mercedes diesels, my 1958 180d was still going strong at 750,000 miles, when I sold it. The fellow who bought it ran it over 1 million, before it finally wore out. Having had a bunch of different types of cars, I would always choose the 617 first, then the VW rabbit diesel, and finally the old chevy 250 straight 6 gasser.

Love them or not, the 617 has proved to be the choice of the world for "hard duty" cars in war zones, deserts, and third world areas. No other car can come close to the record these old diesels can boast.

__________________
1973 Mercedes 280 "Strich Acht Dunkle Rot"

Its funny but as much time that Ive spent on this site it never gets boring the kind of name calling that goes on from some of the members ,very High School Girlish. :

Yup.

He may not even own a car for that matter. heh!

__________________
'06 E320 CDI
'17 Corvette Stingray Vert

Having owned both, I do tend to put the 603 on an equal plane with the 617. Each has unique flaws, but in my opinion (no more than that) neither is "worse" than the other. Neither set of problems is more catastrophic if you ask me.

Unfortunately, I think Mercedes has moved permanently in the direction of cars that I don't personally have much interest in. There's absolutely no profitable call for a fully mechanical engine anymore, in spite of my and others' personal interest, because in the interest of efficiency and performance, those systems have been COMPLETELY abandoned, at least by MB.

I found the comment that "Mercedes only imports the expensive cars to the US" interesting because my complaint now is that they don't make one that's expensive "enough" to be worth it. Here's what I mean. There are people (I'm one) who always have and always will want a BIG car. As in, Crown Vic or SDL size. Mercedes doesn't MAKE one that big anymore. The current S-class looks so un-presidential, so small and sporty -- that I'd never pay what one costs. If my current objection to the modern S-class is that "It's not a big enough car, at any price, so it SURE isn't worth $150K" ... then the last thing they need to do is import more small, inexpensive stuff if they want to attract me.

I'm NOT saying there's no market for small, inexpensive, cloth-seated standard transmission cars. I may own some myself. (I do own a 240D already) --- so I'm NOT insulting people who do want a cheaper car imported with a euro-diesel in it. Trust me, I understand the desire. But for me personally... if I were going for an "affordable" car I wouldn't start with an M-B in any case from brand-new. So, if I were a brand-new MB customer, I'd be looking at s-class. And the s-class just isn't s-class-y enough anymore to be worth buying, in my eyes. The w116/w126/w140 are what the top-of-the-line should "look like" to me... nowadays the top model looks like a slightly elongated C-class. I have nothing AGAINST c-classes... for what they are. But I don't think the s-class should imitate them. There should be at least some distinction so that people can make the choice that appeals to them more.

So they should import cheaper euro diesels AND make a super-S-class to accomodate us all

Either way, they'll never go back to computerless engines.

__________________


~Michael S.~
Past cars:

1986 300SDL
1987 300SDL
1982 240D
1982 300SD


Current:

1987 300SDL

Durability can be defined many ways. I see cars in the junkyard with shiny paint, just not wanted any more. More Mercedes survive longer probably as much because they are still wanted and valued as for any technical reasons: they are repaired when they break and have more attention paid to their cosmetics. Ask a Rolls-Royce owner: many would have been scrapped long ago, but for That Radiator Shell and Magic Name. In short: if you want it to last, you will take the necessary actions and it will last. When you are tired of it, it will go to the scrap yard. Most people want a car with function and shine and a warranty, not to work on but to drive.

__________________
Providing a home for these cars:
1951 Buick Special De Luxe
1977 Rolls-Royce Silver Wraith II
1970 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow
1986 Mercedes-Benz 420 SEL
2005 Mercedes-Benz E 320 CDI
2012 GMC Sierra 1500 4X4
1927 Pierce-Arrow Series 80
1931 Pierce-Arrow Series 43
1926 Ford Model T coupe

The earlier ones were probably built even heavier and ran at lower RPM (max 3600 for the 636) than the 617 (max 5200). Which leads one to wonder how much the life of a 617 could be extended by having it hooked up to a five speed so it would spend more of its life below 3000 rpm instead of above it.
__________________

__________________
'83 SD, 2x '85 SD
You are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts.

Has anyone ever seen a 606 transplanted into another vehicle ?,just curious.

Why yes, someone has: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSM8qporT0Y

-J

__________________
1991 350SDL. 230,000 miles (new motor @ 150,000). Blown head gasket

Tesla Model 3. 205,000 miles. Been to 48 states!
Past: A fleet of VW TDIs.... including a V10,a Dieselgate Passat, and 2 ECOdiesels.
2014 Cadillac ELR
2013 Fiat 500E.

Seen that one ,Go to the race track on Saturday and work on it on Monday.So the 606 intrigue is that itll burn up the track? Id put money into a car to drive it not fly it.Its an opinion.

Here you go

__________________
1982 300GD Carmine Red (DB3535) Cabriolet Parting Out
1990 300SEL Smoke Silver (Parting out)
1991 350SDL Blackberry Metallic (481)

"The thing is Bob, its not that I'm lazy...its that I just don't care."

if you look in Europe you will see taxis that have 700,000 to a 1 million km on them with engines after the 617. I think the newer engines are just as reliable, and do provide more efficiency, power and are quieter.
I am interested to see how these new CDI engines that produce all that horsepower will hold up, like the 450hp motor mentioned above.

you do know the guy has over a thousand posts and has been active on this forum since 2005 right? You may not agree with him, but thats no excuse for belittling someone. Especially if hes been a member of the forum 4 years longer than you have.

I personally don't agree with chas, though I do take the time to at least respect his opinion. I love the 617 as well, but it remains a 30 year old outdated engine design. In fact, personally, I find that my 1989 chevy astro is far more reliable than my 1984 mercedes once you compare just what you spend on each, and how often each has broken down.

__________________
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

What am I looking at, custom limo from somewhere?

In my opinion that's what the S-class should look like rolling off the mass assembly line, minus the window curtains. THAT looks like a proper successor to the w126.

__________________


~Michael S.~
Past cars:

1986 300SDL
1987 300SDL
1982 240D
1982 300SD


Current:

1987 300SDL

The age of the "overbuilt" engines is over. Way back when, before modern computer aided design and physics simulation software, the engineers overbuilt the components. I.e. they were designed significantly higher than their failure threshold, to ensure the reliability and longevity that customers expected in a premium car. Nowadays, computer allow them to save cost by designing components that just barely meet the requirements for the service life and warranty life of the vehicle. One only needs to open the hood of a modern car, and be astounded by the amount of plastic in there. BMW is making entire intake manifolds out of plastic! Is it because a plastic manifold is more durable and reliable than metal? Of course not. It's because the plastic manifold is much cheaper to manufacture, and is "good enough".

Additionally, the constant drive for companies to improve their margins and profitability in this difficult world economy, is frequently to the detriment of quality. Look at Porsche. Once the pinnacle of reliability, with their air-cooled flat 6 engine that was continually refined over several decades. Starting in the late 1990's with their new M96 water-cooled engine, they've had nothing but problems. That engine was designed specifically to be a lower-manufacturing-cost replacement of its overbuilt air-cooled predecessor. It's lower cost alright, but with nearly two dozen catastrophic new failure modes.

It's a win-win situation for the manufacturers. They save money by reducing their build costs, and they sell more new cars since the current ones don't last as long. The auto manufacturers and the federal government both want you to stop driving your old car, and instead trade it in for a shiny new one. Remember "Cash for clunkers"?

"They don't make 'em like they used to" is more and more true with each new generation.

__________________
'98 E300 turbodiesel

you have to cut costs to stay competitive. If Mercedes built their cars like they used nobody would buy because they would be too expensive. They have to cut costs to stay competitive with the price with other manufacturers. Most consumers are not always technical and the bottom line is definitely a deciding factor.