300TD vs 300D vs 300SD - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

The Warden · #1 03-24-2002, 01:57 AM

Okay, after perusing around the site a bit, I haven't decided which would wind up being best for me. *lol*

The single biggest concern to me is reliability. This is why I'm getting a diesel

and won't consider anything else. I assume the drivetrain's the same between the bodystyles, so unless there's body-specific problems (haven't seen anything yet; dunno for sure either way), I'm assuming reliability's equal for both.

The second biggest concern is fuel mileage. I'm hoping for 30mpg. I would assume that the 300D, by probably a fairly thin margin, gets the best mileage simply due to having slightly less mass. I don't know where the 300SD and the 300TD would stand in relation to each other. Any input there?

If everything else was equal, my first choice would be a 300TD due to the extra carrying capacity (would need the 3rd seat), but with how rare they seem to be, I figure it's best to not hold my breath. Also, with the conditions I drive in, I'm figuring that a turbo's necessary...I have a feeling that a 240D or a 190D would be too underpowered for my needs. Also, luxury factors don't play a big factor...if the mileage was the same, the extra size of a 300SD would be nice, but that's not an important factor for me.

BTW, this will be a daily commuter, with about 250 miles put on it per week. At 14mpg, I can't continue doing that wiht my van...'sides, I've always liked the early to mid '80's M-B's. Also, any years to look for or avoid?

So, any thoughts? I'm doing a basic poll, although any general or specific thoughts/reasoning would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

{added in edit} Also, I wwant to shoot for a pre '87...an older car than that's more likely to fit in my price range (roughly $3K, depending on what my van sells for), and besides, I really don't want to deal with an aluminum cylinder head...that's one of the biggest reasons I chose an M-B over a Volkswagen...

#2 03-24-2002, 04:14 AM

Well, all three cars have a special place in my heart.

The 300D for being the utilitarian car that it really is, for being smaller, lighter and more nimble. Pretty much the same way I feel about the 300TD, but you can haul more crap around with it. Bonus.

The 300SD for being a TANK. The ride, the feeling of being so safe and secure like driving a bank vault. The ride at high speed, seems like no speed phases this car, 100, 110, 120, 130.. (had my old 420SEL to 130, awsome). Handling is amazing to, IMHO, better than the 300D.

Bottom line, if you do alot of city driving, go for the 300D/TD. Highway driving, go for the SD.

The Warden · #3 03-24-2002, 04:28 AM

Thanks for your response

Most of my driving's on freeways in city traffic (San Francisco Bay Area). I also do runs down to the Los Angeles area (have family there, although I wind up taking my pickup truck often as not).

Is there a noticeable fuel mileage difference between the SD and the D/TD? Any "raw" numbers? I'm sure they won't translate exactly; everyone has a different driving style...but it'll at least give me an idea on what to expect.

Thanks again!

#4 03-24-2002, 04:32 AM

Me, personally I've never been able to get more than 26MPG out of my old 300D. Some people say they get around 30, but you -really- gotta drive like granny, and that just ain't my style.

My 300SDL is constantly at 80-85MPH so I get a consistent 23.5MPG out if it as a comparison, but my car has a different engine. If I were to drive at 55 or 65 I'm sure I would get 27 to 30.

mplafleur · #5 03-24-2002, 10:31 AM

Doesn't the SDL have the 603 motor? This is the 3.5l with all the problems?

I got around 30mpg in my '75 300D, and was no granny either.

Currently I'm thinking that an '86 300SD or an '87 300D is on the top of my list. Can anyone give me mpg numbers for each of these? How does handling compare on these models?

DZLPWR · #6 03-24-2002, 12:48 PM

My 87 300SDL does 30mpg on most trips cruising 70-73 mph. On a long trip of back country roads, cruising at about 50mph, I did 32mpg. In town it's about 27-28. I'm sure if you push the speed the mileage drops quick. Around here above 75mph will get you a ticket.

If you can find an 87 190 2.5 turbo, it would be worth driving. They claim 40mpg and impressive performance with a top speed of 120mph. But they're rare & hard to find. I don't know much about the 87 2.5 turbo engine. I just always liked the idea of performance and 40mpg diesel.

Stay away from any of the wagons. I don't need the competition in finding a nice one!

Robert W. Roe · #7 03-24-2002, 12:57 PM

The 603 engine has the aluminum head and 6 cylinders. The three liter version is found in the 87 300D and 300TD and the W126 SDL of the same years. The W126 350SD and 350SDL, and any W140 SD are the 3.5 liter "rod-bender" engines, yet some people have been lucky with them.

1985 was the last year for the iron head turbo-5 M617. I've seen close to 27 mpg a couple times, but average mostly in the low 20's, maybe 22-23 mpg in overall driving (city stop and go, highway 70+ mph). If I could keep her below 65 or so, I'd be over 25 mpg consistently, but with the new Michelins it's hard to keep her below 75.

Personally I LOVE the 123 TD wagons, but they do seem to get a good premium over the sedans. As much as double a 300D in some cases. A VW dealer had an 84 with 98K miles that they were asking $8K OBO, and it was gone in DAYS. I drove it, and the AC and cruise didn't work, but I almost made an offer [sigh].

The 300D is a great all around car, perfect size for most applications. The SD is a great land yacht, perfect for relaxing driving on interstates. Trips of several hundred miles are what they do best, in traffic and wind conditions that would have lesser cars' drivers white-knucking their steering wheels while the SD passes along unruffled.

I don't think you can go wrong with any of them, personally.

Hope this helps, Bob

mplafleur · #8 03-24-2002, 01:55 PM

If the 300SDL doesn't have the "rod-bender" version of the 6-cyl, then I will include that in my list.

I will honor your wish and stay away from the TD's.

diesel don · #9 03-24-2002, 03:22 PM

If you are looking for reliability, consider how much elbow grease you are willing to invest. I consider the engine and tranny's fairly bullet proof, but would advise you to dust off your tools for future use if you're ready to dive in. I truly enjoy these cars but they keep me buying alot of "hand cleaner".

The 300D is awesome and our D-T delivers about 27 mpg. The TD is nice with the extra seat and delivers about 24-25 mpg. Of the 3 we have, the TD is always in need of attention while the D-T is rather dependable. Too early to tell on the 240D.

Don

The Warden · #10 03-24-2002, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by diesel don
If you are looking for reliability, consider how much elbow grease you are willing to invest. I consider the engine and tranny's fairly bullet proof, but would advise you to dust off your tools for future use if you're ready to dive in. I truly enjoy these cars but they keep me buying alot of "hand cleaner".

I do about 90% of my own work, and with two 18 year old trucks, my tools never get the chance to get dusty.

I basically don't want something that's gonna nickel-and-dime me to death (one reason I don't want a g@$$er), and as long as it drives and stops reliably, the heater, a/c, windows, cruise control (I do enough freeway driving to make this important), gauges, turn signals, lights, and windshield wipers all work, I'm happy.

Is there an obvious reason why the TD needs more attention typically than the D? Abusive past, older age, or is there a difference in general? For instance, my van's always running while the truck almost always needs something done to it; this is just about solely due to the truck having sat in the desert for 5 years before it was inherited to me.
Also, what kinda stuff are you typically doing to the TD?

Again, I definitely want to stick to '85 or earlier (no aluminum for me! and, again, I think an '87's out of my price range)...although, for a 300D or TD, that only gives me a window of 4 years (I think a turbo's better suited for me)...and the SD gives me a window of about 8 years, I think...hmm...it really does sound pretty even...

Any more responses would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

p.s. As far as fuel mileage goes, I typically stick to the speed limit (65 to 70mph)...from what it sounds like, the difference is negligible...thoughts?

can-do · #11 03-24-2002, 07:48 PM

Greetings,

They all would make fine commuter cars, and as far as MPG is concerned there isn't noticable difference between them. On my 300SD I average about 28mpg and get about the same in the 300TD with mainly two lane road driving with up and down hill driving, not four lane express where I can set the cruise. I'd expect you can get better mileage if there isn't hilly terrain or constant curves to negociate. Then is on to what comfort level you want as well as room inside either for hauling stuff or just your body to work. The comfy ride most definitely goes to my 300SD which has a broader stance and glides easily down the road with little effort on the drivers part for control. On the 300TD you seem somewhat more cramped unless you aren't a big guy and the handling is a little more have to watch what you're doing type of drive. As far as the 300D is concerned, I'd almost think it would pretty much handle like my 300E does which is quite nice with the shorter length, but not quite that of the SD. They all seem to have some intended purpose when they were designed and built. I like the SD for my daily driver because of the relaxed drive for longer commutes and it's driveability. I like the TD when I need to haul more stuff than the trunk will hold and need to drag the kids with me as well. The 300E is the wifes car and she drives it daily instead of a diesel because she says the diesel is a guy thing, and she's not into it. I think on a long trip or 250 miles or more I'd take the 300SD because I can cruise in comfort and still get the mileage I need with the rising price of fuel.
As far as shopping for a specific year, I like my '84 300SD because the interior door panels are solidly made unlike previous years, and also unlike the 300D which is prone to vinyl stretch and wrinkles. I guess you'll need to look at the interiors of a few models and years to see what I'm talking about as far as upkeep verses built to last from the beginning. Out of all three of my Benzes, the SD has the easiest to maintain and best built interior out of all of them.

Charles

Ridge · #12 03-24-2002, 09:11 PM

The Warden,

I have a 240D with a 300D engine and 240D manual transmission and I get 27-28 around town and have managed 32 something on long trips. I might add that I have the 3.07 rear end (turbo rearend) instead of the normal 3.47, and that makes all the difference. On long hills I need to shift into third but it'll do 75 in third.

The turbo that my son has gets 26 around town but he too has the 240D manual transmission. Goes like scat though.

Ben

diesel don · #13 03-24-2002, 09:33 PM

The Warden,

Since you do 90% of your own work, you're looking at the right car and the right vintage! In fact, I would venture to say that the work you do on MB's will be so much more enjoyable than on other cars. The way things come off and go back on are truly remarkable considering the age. I mentioned that my TD needs more attention, but that is my problem specifically because like a dork, I bought a Michigan car (too much salt). Other than the suspension technicalities, I wouldn't think it was much different than the D.

One thing about price that we've noticed is that if you're patient, you can find some awesome deals. I buddy of mine just got a 83TD with no rust (from Houston) for $2400 and that had a 3rd seat. Awesome deal whereas I paid $5000 for mine. Another buddy of mine has paid between $1200-1600 each for 3 of them. So I think the deals are out there if you're willing to sift through ebay and local stuff.

Don

leathermang · #14 03-24-2002, 10:07 PM

Ridge, How about posting some pictures of that combination... did you install it... what were the fit problems , if any , etc.... sounds like the ideal combo.... Greg

The Warden · #15 03-25-2002, 12:52 AM

Don,

Yep! I know what you mean. My old Scout was a Michigan truck, and there was more black duct tape than metal on the outside.

The structural integrity was actually compromised (removable hard top; when the top was off the truck actually started to slowly collapse, over a period of weeks, right behind the driver's door, so that the holes on the windshield frame didn't line up to the top when we re-installed it)...I made a mistake in buying it, but I never had a problem with the drivetrain (thank GOD it was a diesel!) in the year and a half I owned it 'till the engine cracked a piston...it's scrap metal now (the body condition made it not worthwhile to fix the engine; sold it to a guy for $900 and he parted it out).
I like what you're saying on the self-maintenance...obviously, I'll have to find a good manual on these...but I'll wait 'till I get the car.

I'm willing to wait some, as long as it happens in the end...I'm not looking to spend too much more than $3K (that's what my van should sell for), and have been lookin' idly around eBay and AutoTrader.com...seen a couple good buys; too bad I couldn't act on them immediately...

What it sounds like I really need to do is either find a dealer, a private seller, or a nice guy who happens to own a 300D and/or a 300SD and test-drive one...I can fit in a VW Bug (in fact, for the 2 months before it blew up on the I-5 in Firebaugh, that was my first car), so a 300D oughtta be okay spacewise, although if all else is equal, a larger car is more than fine by me...I still like the extra passenger capacity of the 300TD (for cargo, I've still got my pickup truck), but, again, I'm not holding my breath on one...

View Poll Results: Which do you think I should get?
300D	14	28.00%
300TD	9	18.00%
300SD	24	48.00%
Other (please say what and why)	3	6.00%
Voters: 50. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Freezing locks 300d and 300td	kerry	Diesel Discussion	34	03-03-2020 07:29 PM
'84 300TD & '82 300D vacuum diagram	Mike Ferrell	Diesel Discussion	3	06-11-2007 09:21 PM
What to buy? 300TD, 300SD, or 300SDL?	SamDingo	Diesel Discussion	11	12-03-2003 01:14 AM
300D vs 300TD Performance Disparity	R Leo	Diesel Discussion	9	10-14-2003 08:40 PM
Mercedes 1982 300D actually has a 300SD engine	W107BenzW123MB	Diesel Discussion	1	05-06-2001 06:56 PM