I love my TD. I say go for it. You'd be miles ahead over a 240d if for no other reason than the hydropneumatic suspension.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

i'm new to these cars, but i'm about to drive myself crazy wanting one. i found a 83 300td with around 290,000 miles on it. body is super clean, no dents, no chipping, NO BUBBLES, nothing and the inside is insane clean! the place is wanting 3,995.00 for it. is that a good price for such a car or is it kinda high?

and about how many miles do these little engines get before they go pop???????????

I've seen 750,000 miles and running.Depends alot on maint.you may have to rebuild the head,I don't know.

__________________
1999 w140, quit voting to old, and to old to fight, a god damned veteran

what about the price they have on it?

Well, sounds like a cleaner specimen than the one I just looked at for which the seller was asking a similar price. In my case, this one has had a LOT of mechanical repairs in recent years, so you'd be wise to check the records for this 83, and assess what's been done (and more importantly, what NEEDS to be done). Could get very pricey very quickly if it needs a lot of work, especially if you can't do some of the work yourself and might be dependent on a shop. Very often for old cars like this, the acquisition cost is just the tip of the iceberg, and many costs lie hidden under the surface. Good luck.

__________________
1983 300TD 240K - 1982 240D 215K - 1996 Dodge Cummins 70K

I offered the seller $2000-2500 (which seemed to be consensus here on what this 300TD may be worth in current condition). He said he wouldn't sell it for that (asking over $4K) and would rather keep it in his garage instead. I asked him if he'd take $3500 and am waiting for an answer. I'd check it out more thoroughly if he WAS willing to sell for that. Will see...

My other option at this point is this nice '03 Volvo V70 wagon (basic model, no turbo, no AWD, 5 speed manual), for around $5500. I know the latter makes more sense, but there is something very attractive about the 300td, in spite of its shortcomings. I must have more of a fondness for W123's than I thought...

__________________
1983 300TD 240K - 1982 240D 215K - 1996 Dodge Cummins 70K

The solid jacking points are a positive sign, where the rust issue is concerned.

Did you ever tell us how many miles this car has on it?

From what you have told us about the vehicle, I think your offer of $3500 is fair. It's hard to work stuff like this out without at least seeing pics of the car.

A complete engine rebuild would be more than $6k at a shop for sure. I would imagine what you are seeing receipts for is either a head rebuild or possibly a re-ring job. A re-ring is probably not good for more than 40k kms.

Someone saying that the rear suspension was rebuilt doesn't mean much: what was rebuilt? Could mean just the valve, or the accumulators, or the lines, or the system pump, or the shocks were replaced, or some combo of those components (in ascending order of cost that could mean anything from $400 to $3,000 or more at a shop).

You say it's sluggish around town. It should not be, but there are numerous possibilities there before that's a compression issue (examples: linkages not set up correctly, ALDA broken, line to ALDA broken, stuck turbo wastegate, etc.). Was the exhaust smoky around town?

Concerning the Volvo: An '04 V70 is a lovely car but everything costs a mint. Those cars have a very sophisticated electrical system with very few wires but many computer modules around the car. And with Volvo sophisticated = $$$$$. Not only are some of the modules VIN-series or MY-dependent (making buying used or even rebuilt tricky) but some must be programmed by either a dealer or an indy shop with a very expensive computer to match your exact VIN, prior to installation. Beware

__________________


Mac
2002 e320 4matic estate│1985 300d│1980 300td
Previous: 1979 & 1982 & 1983 300sd │ 1982 240d

“Let's take a drive into the middle of nowhere with a packet of Marlboro lights and talk about our lives.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

he said 270k miles, engine rebuilt at 200k. trans rebuilt too.

__________________
1985 300d champagne/palomino ~133k
1979 300d dead parts car ~???

Hi the ad seems to have been pulled so someone else probably snapped it up. The owner had told me the engine rebuild had cost $8K, and was done at a non-MB shop (a VW shop if I recall ). I never was shown receipts for recent work done (it was too early in the game for me to ask for those), so was going by what the seller was telling me. A lot of the work (front end, transmission rebuild, rear leveling) was done by a MB mechanic in southern US (where the car was driven to during recent winters), I assumed working in his own shop.

I think the sluggishness around town was just a matter of my driving it with a light foot, so the car seemed a little slow until the turbo engaged. It had fine acceleration on the highway, WAY better than a 240D anyway! (not hard to beat).

Anyway, I've decided to go with the 100k '03 V70 (thanks for the words of caution about electronics and programming!). It's a low-frills basic model (no turbo, no AWD, manual transmission, no sunroof) in apparently very good mechanical condition (have spoken to the 2 shops who maintained it, and seen service records). Lady driven, very clean, yadayada. I'm taking it to my mechanic this week for his inspection. So I suppose my 240D will remain my W123 horse in the stable, and I'll have a more modern station wagon to carry stuff around!

Thanks for all your thoughts and help, this was informative! I'll let you know if I find out whether this 300TD has sold.

Cheers.

__________________
1983 300TD 240K - 1982 240D 215K - 1996 Dodge Cummins 70K

I wish you the best with the Volvo. As you have by now discovered, the seats are to DIE for. Frankly Id' take a set for my house

Generally the '03 and up models have very good repair histories, much superior to the 2001 and somewhat better than '02.

If you haven't visited it already, you may want to look at this site:
http://www.matthewsvolvosite.com/volvo-repair-database/

There are of course some great forums too, I can't recommend one over another as I'm only current on the one for the AWD (XC) models.

Cheers

__________________


Mac
2002 e320 4matic estate│1985 300d│1980 300td
Previous: 1979 & 1982 & 1983 300sd │ 1982 240d

“Let's take a drive into the middle of nowhere with a packet of Marlboro lights and talk about our lives.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

240D has around 67 horsepower and is "merging onto a normal highway challenged" - yes you will get great mileage but the 300TD has it all over the 240D with the turbo, cargo area - only thing I do not like is the suspension - a person would be better off converting to regular 300D shocks and a set of springs and forget the hydraulic issues all together.

Thanks for that, but I pulled away from the deal at the 11th hour.

Paperwork indicated the female owner bought the car from a dealer who brought it from outside of province with fairly high mileage (85,000 kms in 2 years). Not knowing how the vehicle was maintained during those crucial early years made me leery of the deal. Plus my partner told me it would be a shame she couldn't help with some of the road-trip driving (she's never driven standard and doesn't expect she would like to learn...).

So yeah, it may well have been a good Volvo wagon, but for reasons known and unknown, it just didn't feel "right" to me, so I'll keep looking. If I could get a low mileage 240/740/940 wagon I'd be more tempted I think - simpler to maintain.

I've test driven a couple of Honda CRV's (another vehicle I'm looking at in a "wagon" configuration, for practical purposes) but it's quite a different (and less comfortable - cramped is how I felt - interior) vehicle to a Volvo. Reliable, probably, but how does one balance out reliability/cost of ownership/comfort, is a tough equation.

Thanks for your thoughts and encouragement.

__________________
1983 300TD 240K - 1982 240D 215K - 1996 Dodge Cummins 70K

My 240D is a late one (82) which I'm told may have a couple more HP (than the early models). Anyway, I certainly like its simplicity and fuel efficiency. 300D/TD would require more upkeep and fixing, from all I've heard. But there are advantages on the "plus" side, as you indicated. I didn't realize one could dispense with the hydraulic suspension on the wagon and go with a more straightforward sedan-like arrangement.

I'll keep my eyes peeled for a "better" specimen W123 wagon, or maybe one of the nice W124 diesel wagons. In the meantime, I'll keep driving my 240D and Dodge Cummins pickup...

__________________
1983 300TD 240K - 1982 240D 215K - 1996 Dodge Cummins 70K

They would need to be some pretty stuff shocks!

The rear is way heavier than the rear of the sedans, and that is unburdened.
VIC, I have a 79 and 80 240D with MT and never really have any problem merging onto the freeway. Proper throttle linkage adjustment is pretty critical tho....

__________________

Current Mercedes
1979 maple yellow 240D 4-speed

Gone and fondly remembered:
1980 orient red 240D 4-speed

Gone and NOT fondly remembered:
1982 Chna Blue 300TD

Other car in the stable:
2013 VW Jetta Sportwagen TDI / 6-speed MT