I recently posted about buying a w123/w116/w126 car as a daily driver to replace my two older vehicles. I have an 82 diesel c30 pickup that I daily drive but I want something that fits in the garage and is more practical. I get bored driving cheap new Japanese cars and fix all of my vehicles myself. I also want a turbodiesel, have always loved them and wont bend on this. The trouble is I want something that doesn't need any repairs to bring it up to snuff, but dont mind doing maintenance on it myself in the future, really looking for a near mint condition car. All of the older 1980's mb's I have looked at that were priced reasonably have needed work, from saggy seats, to worn out interiors, or oil leaks (personal pet peeve). The only cars that I have found in this condition all have insane asking prices from $15k to even $30k!! The KBB values for one of these is 12-14k in absolute mint condition for an sd and around 8k for a w123.

So After some looking I came across the w210 e300 diesels. The OM606 seems to be a great engine that doesn't have the problematic heads that the 603's do and has much more power than the 617. The transmissions are not known to leak like the older ones behind the 617, and have overdrive. And the cars dont have the same vacuum leaks that plague the 35 year old mb's. However the more I read the more I hear that the w210 is a problematic design (I know about the rusty spring perches) and represents the time period when mb stopped over engineering cars and began its decline in quality. However w210's I have looked at in the $9k price range have nicer interiors, are stylish, no leaks, and are geared and powered for modern highway driving. Are the W210's really that bad that I should keep searching to find the perfect w123 at a good price? Also I would consider the w124 or w140 instead but want to avoid the om603, especially without a turbo, and I really don't like the styling of those cars. Thanks for the help!

We have owned a 98 W210 E320 (gasser) since 2001 - 230k km (143k miles) The car still looks and runs great. The 99 diesel is pretty well the same car. We had spring perches and other known rust spot attended to while under warranty. Since then two minor rust repairs - one wheel well rim and around sun roof. Other than regular maintenance items like brakes, plugs, etc this is what I recall doing to car over 14 years:
- leaky transmission plug (low cost)
- one rear window lift
- sunroof mechanism repaired
- ABS pump failed (could be expensive, but repaired with used unit)
- A/C Evaporator has leak. Not repaired because of high cost.
- Serpentine belt broke.
- MAF (air flow meter) replaced
- Catalysts replaced.

All DIY repairs except for serpentine belt (happened on trip)

Interior is still in good shape and we have had no mechanical problems. Still on original mufflers & pipes from cats back.

These cars are low priced on market and can be a good buy if you find a well kept one. Diesels are more scarce, often have high mileage and higher asking prices. By the 4-matics didn't have the spring perch problem.

__________________
Graham
85 300D,72 350SL, 98 E320, Outback 2.5

You don't say where you are located. if you are in the US rust belt where they throw down lots of salt, it will be hard to find a 210 that doesn't have rust issues, which may be hidden. i looked for a long time. if this is the case, a 2005/6 E320 CDI may be a better bet. Many things are owner serviceable, some are not without a scanner. The W211 is much better protected from the salt then the 210.

Down south, where they don't salt the roads, or possibly where they use sand instead of salt, maybe you would find a good example.

__________________
1959 Gravely LI, 1963 Gravely L8, 1973 Gravely C12
1982 380SL
1978 450 SEL 6.9 euro restoration at 63% and climbing
1987 300 D
2005 CDI European Delivery
2006 CDI Handed down to daughter
2007 GL CDI. Wifes

FWIW. Skip down to the second page of this section and there's a post titled "Which is the Best Year for a w210 Diesel" by BigDaddyBenz and there's some good member comments about the w210 diesels.

__________________
'89 260e (212K Mi.), '92 400e (208K Mi.), '92 400e (not a misprint) (146K Mi.), '95 C220, '81 240D--Sold

I'll go out on a limb and say 210 Diesel problems aren't chronic - once fixed, they stay fixed. Are you willing to spend the time and money to sort one?

Check carefully the spring perches of any 210 you consider. Rust has been found in 210s that never saw salt.

As far as 210s, if you want overdrive, look at 97-99s. If you want a turbo, look at 98-99s. Some advise to work new glow plugs into the purchase agreement. Agree to a sale price with new glow plugs installed by a reputable shop payable when the glow plugs are successfully installed. Enter a formal escrow arrangement if necessary. If problems arise such as an old glow plug gets stuck or broken, the seller pays the additional cost to resolve or you walk away from the deal.

Sixto
83 300SD

I've had my e300 for two years now and have enjoyed it very much. It is a DD/work car. If you are handy and come here for help pretty much any DIY job maintenance or greater can be done afford ably. That said, I am waiting for the w211's to come down in price a bit then I'd get one of those.

__________________
Treetops
06 E320 CDI 127K Miles
87 300TD 231K Miles

99 E300 269K Miles-Sold

Thanks for the help guys, now the more research I do I am getting scared of rust on the w210 after reading some horror stories. How bad is the rust really? I live in ny, dont mind getting a southern or western car, but I will have to drive it here during the winter. The w211's are not priced much higher than most w210's I have looked at, and both have around 100k-150k miles, MB also has a reputation for serious decline in build quality in the late 90's to mid 2000's, are the w210's and w211's an example of this decline in quality? Which car do you think I would be better off with in terms or reliability and build quality? Or should I just hold out for a well preserved w126?

If you are considering a 210, I would suggest you just go for an E320. They are much more plentiful and lower priced. There is no material difference in fuel costs between the two. I've owned both a '98 E300 and '01 E320. The m112 needed spark plugs less frequently than the OM606 needed glow plugs. The E320 (a wagon) delivered about 23 city and 28 highway MPG in my use. The E300 sedan did perhaps 28 and 32 (it once got 33).

An early 211 E320 is a solid car with better build quality and much better rust resistance than the 210. It has the same solid drivetrain as the earlier E320. The SBC brakes on the 211 present the risk of a $1500 repair if/when the SBC unit needs to be replaced. Other than that it's a pretty solid car.

my 2000 model year E320 has been great to me. Its the facelifted model so it has the stronger transmission (bearing in front planet set rather than bushing)

the M112 engine is pretty elastic and has very good tractable power - lots of mid range torque.

It looks pretty decent too once when its washed and shined up. I just give it regular servicing and keep up with preventive maintenance rather than wait for it to break down. It keeps on humming smoothly. Its diagnostics are a bit more involved and will require some extra tooling to sort out.

__________________
2012 BMW X5 (Beef + Granite suspension model)

1995 E300D - The original humming machine (consumed by Flood 2017)
2000 E320 - The evolution (consumed by flood 2017)

There is no reason to spend more than $4500 or so for an excellent condition W210. I know because I just sold one for that!

The rust is a real but manageable issue. Don't let that in and of itself scare you away. When I bought my 98 two years ago, I had to spend $700 to address the rust on all four wheel wells. Car still looks great.

That being said, if you can pull together $8-9,000, get a CDI. A better car in every respect IMO...especially since you live in a high salt area.

__________________
14 E250 Bluetec 4Matic "Sinclair", Palladium Silver on Black, 154k miles
06 E320 CDI "Rutherford", Black on Tan, 172k mi, Stage 1 tune, tuned TCU
91 300D "Otis", Smoke Silver on Tan, 142k mi, wastegate conversion, ALDA delete

19 Honda CR-V EX 61k mi
Fourteen other MB's owned and sold
1961 Very Tolerant Wife

I can't speak to the rust issue but otherwise our '96 E300D (non-turbo) is, at 302,000 miles, a fairly boring car--rarely does anything break.

In general, later cars are more electronic, break less often but harder/more expensive to repair if they do break. Later cars also have more safety systems (airbags, etc.).

The CDI owners on this forum seem quite pleased with their purchases. More money but still affordable.

Jeremy

My W210 has been a good work/DD car. I'm down here in the sun belt so there are plenty of rust-free examples. Perhaps they suffer because they don't have the old-school charm of the W123/124/126 diesels, and neither are they refined as the W211, but I would say they are fine cars and a good value right now since they seem to have reached full depreciation.

__________________
Charlie

---------------------------
'66 VW 1300 96K miles
'97 E300D 239K miles
'85 300D 203K miles (sold Sep 2012)

My opinion:

The 210 is a great driving car for the money, but I have no love for the '97 n/a diesel, it's a slug. If you're going to look at 210 diesels look at the peppier '98-'99 turbo, it is quick enough to keep up with traffic, pass reasonably quickly, and can also be fairly easily modified for more power. If you don't go turbo, get the E320 as others have said, a robust and fairly economical engine with good power.

Rust is an issue, cosmetically and structurally on these cars. It also exists on the late 124s more cosmetically, most common around wheel openings and body-clip holes (similar to W210s).

Which brings me to the 124. I've had both, and will take a 603-powered 124 over anything except a very clean southern '98-'99 E300 Turbodiesel. The 603 turbo is a great engine, a bit lower on power than the 606 turbo but I've never had a head issue and have run a couple of the #14 heads to 250k miles. Don't overheat it and be sure you keep proper fluids in the car, ... The later OM602 124s are also very good cars, but the power is IMO a bit less than it needs for the weight, performance more like the '97 n/a E300. Beware of the '90s wire harness issues in Mercedes cars.

I would rather have a diesel than a gas engine in my hobby cars, but feel that the M104 in the E320s is an excellent alternative otherwise. Drive one. In the 124 ('94/'95) it is very peppy, will smoke the tires with traction control off, same in the 210s. Of course this puts you in the rusty years and bad wire harness years with both cars, but if it is in good shape they are both solid and responsive cars with much more refinement than the earlier body cars.

I also agree with the other above posters, if you budget allows a W211, another level up in refinement and good quality. Each step increases purchase and maintenance costs, but returns a better car.

Start with your budget and decide, and remember the old saying that there's nothing inexpensive about a cheap Mercedes (et al). Give strong preference to an older car with good/great maintenance and a known history over a later car with a checkered past.

__________________

Gone to the dark side

- Jeff