Ben, Thank you for your support 5 speed We will be looking forward to the pictures and descriptions Greg

rebootit,

You are comparing oranges to apples. Your '83 is a turbo, this is not a fair comparison to a non turbo 240D. Even with the lack of power all the doodads to keep up is not worth it to me. Even worse is when you have to do something under the hood of a five cylinder.

A couple of years ago, I pulled the engine out of my 240D just to replace the clutch. It was absolutely a piece of cake. Not long after that I had to pull the five cylinder out of my daughters car and it was a MAJOR PAIN IN THE BACKSIDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

leathermang,

I understand your desire for a five cylinder manual transmission car, and maybe some day I'll build one for grins, but the simplicity of the four and ease of repair and maintenance is completely overwhelming to me. This was especially so when I was driving 60,000 to 70,000 miles per year with no extra time on my hands.

everyone,

I would be curious to know how many five cylinder fans do their own repair and maintenance. For those who have it done, I can see how the five would be preferrable. For us poor folks who wrench on them ourselves, the four is a dream come true.

My $0.02,

Larry, I have that low mileage 5 (non turbo) sitting in the yard, and have not determined what the cause of the 'excessive' oil consumption is on the 4 . So maybe I am just padding the decision process if I have to use it because it would be cheaper than a major overall of the 4

And when I say sitting in the yard, I don't mean sitting in a car in the yard. I mean sitting on the grass in the yard

Hippie
I have both. And I like them both, but prefer the coupe for its lovely engine! I can drive it on the interstate without fear of not being able to keep up on the upgrades, etc. It is smooth and fairly quiet too. Since you live in the bay area as I do, and in your area there are a few upgrades to deal with, I think you would be happier with a 5.
As to the shape and styling of the 123, well, it may be the most perfectly styled Mercedes ever IMHO, except some older coupes and perhaps a 68 280sel...oooohhhh.

__________________
Ed
1981 300CD (Benzina)
1968 250 S (Gina) 266,000 miles!
1983 Alfa Romeo GTV6 (Guido)
1976 Jaguar XJS-saved a V-12 from the chevy curse, what a great engine!
1988 Cadillac Eldorado (better car than you might think!)
1988 Yamaha Venture (better than a Wing!)
1977 Suzuki GS750B
1976 Yamaha XS 650 (sold)
1991 Suzuki GSX1100G (Shafty Gixser)
1981 Yamaha VX920RH (Euro "Virago")
Solex Moped
1975 Dodge P/U camper


"Time spent in the company of a cat, a beer, and this forum, is not time wasted!"

I do my own wrenching on both. The 240 is about as easy as it gets, the 300 has it's moments but all in all it's just not that bad to work on. I'm not saying one is better than the other overall, I like them both. However if I am driving 500 miles I would much rather be driving the 300. My 240 on the other hand as zero oil leaks. Not a single one, bottom of the car is clean. The 300 has leaks from the oil filter stand to block, seeps around the lower oil pan, and the turbo drain has started to seep. It will leave a dime size spot every time I park it. Since I don't have to add oil between changes it's not bad but I would like it to be leak free.

I was looking in the newspaper and found a 1978 300D(NON-TURBO) with 148K miles on new engine. Sounds good to me. I'm going to take a look at the car tommorow.


Another question I have is my parents told me that when I get the above car that I would need to get my own insurance. I was think AAA. What type of coverage would you get on the 300D and the 250?

Thanks for all your help,
(If this board wasn't here I would be lost)

__________________
Shea

See All My Mercedes-Benz Cars And Other Cars (Click Here)

Visit http://www.cform.net/

The first 5 banger was a 123D non-turbo in my family since 86. I now have a 82 300Sd. We, me, my dad, or both have done all repairs including pulling engines, tranny's, complete AC removal, repair...etc.... I would never, ever, not matter how much the AC messed up,etc.... ever get a 240. I need to go faster than that car and go and for me there is just no substitute for the power.(I live in SoCal, things move a little fast down here maybe?) I also have blown many a 240 stick away with my auto 123D so not all that extra power is lost in the auto tranny. Ask any old engine builder, it's darn hard to find a substitute for good old fashioned displacement.

As for the difficulty in fixing problems, I found the dificulty was only in learning the system. Once I had an understanding, then I just trouble shot and fixed accordingly. Not knowing how all those vacuum systems work would make troubleshooting most unpleasant. Sure it's a larger motor to remove, 2 more valve to adjust, but for my needs, totally worth it. In fact, after now driving the turbo 300SD, I will never own a non-turbo model no matter what. It's just so much nicer to drive when you don't have to flog it.

Frank.

__________________
'82 300SD

Is it only me or do they (200-240D's) sound different to the 300's?

I don't think that I'd find the 240D underpowered since I barely use full throttle on the 300CD. When it's on full power though I think it sounds nice. (even my friends who are used to new gas cars)

I did pass on a 240D stick that looked pretty nice around here. However the owner wanted $5500. I haven't seen a nice one ever since.. only rusted out cars (NE)

BTW, when I went to see my mech. today there was a pretty beat up 190D (not the W201, the older one) with incandescent sealed beams and a very old Mass. (inspection?) sticker..

they told me that they're resurrecting the beast! Can't wait to hear it run. The body, while rusty wasn't so bad and there was no rusted through panels.

__________________
2008 BMW 335i Coupe

Frank,

I think you missed my point. I can troubleshoot all those doodads as good as the next guy. That's not the point. My point is that I am perfectly capable of winding up my own windows, giving a tug at my own manual sunroof, I even have enough since to lower the temperature when I'm hot, and I am not too lazy to shift my own gears. Therefore, I don't need all these doodads. If they are not on the car, that is the only way I can avoid the need to spend time fixing the junk.

Also, it is much less frustrating and more time effective to do most anything under the hood of a 240D.

As far as power goes, I KNOW that my manual 240D will outrun my daughters normally aspirated 300D with the mandatory automatic. A later model turbo would, of course, be a different story. Even then, I would rather have simplicity and reliability than the extra power. You don't have to drive a 240D for very long to acquire the necessary patience. As a matter of fact, driving a 240D is probably the best lesson in patience you will ever get.

As far as California freeways go, I have driven A LOT on California freeways, Southern AND Northern California. California does not have the market cornered on aggressive freeway drivers. I've driven on freeways, autobahns, autostradas and motorways in many different cities all over North America and Western Europe. They're all very similar, with similar needs for acceleration. There again, you just have to learn how to use these acceleration challenged engineering masterpieces to their fullest.

I am not in any way ridiculing those who like all the doodads. They made different cars available because there are different people with different likes and dislikes. I was merely curious if the people who prefer the doodads have to keep them all working by themselves as I do.

Have a great day,

I totally understand the beauty of simplicity. I had to disassemble the window switches and clean them, fix AC issues, and other stuff. When I fixed 'em, they were good to go and are still going. Sure it's a pain when stuff breaks, that I would never argue. I don't have much money being a college student and I hate it when things don't work right so I personall do fix all the doodads when they start acting up.

As a basic transpo car, the manual with a larger engine would be nice(or with turbo nicer). For getting out and driving I prefer a stick. Stop and go commuting, an auto. As I said, for my needs, which I admit don't include much patience for struggling 4 bangers, I want it to go when I want it to go. The 300D is slow, the 240 is way slow. I can't speak for your daughters car but 300D lined up against a few 240s and never once did they keep up especially in the higher gears. Just didn't have the torque.

So in what's better, it all depends on your needs....

Frank.

__________________
'82 300SD

I found a cheap 300D around were I live. It is a 1978 300D with 1,500 miles on it. It has a rebuilt engine. Got it for $1,500.00. Just have a few questions to ask.

1. I have some Silicone Paste. Should I use this on the windowshield seals? Inside and outside?

2. It seems that maybe the glowplug relay might be dead. When I put in the key and turn it to "2" the glow light goes on for about a second then goes off.

3. I have the famous vacuum door locks. Does the trunk unlock and lock with the vacum system. Mine doesn't seem to work, any ideas?

4. The transmission seems to be slow at down shifting from first to second it sounds like the engine is going blow up! Is this how it works?

Thanks for all your help (Will post a picture of it later)
P.S. It doesn't look great becuase the clear coat is coming off on the drivers door and the front panel near the bumper.

__________________
Shea

See All My Mercedes-Benz Cars And Other Cars (Click Here)

Visit http://www.cform.net/

I currently own a 1980 300-D, but used to have a 1980 240 with a manual trans. MAN, do I miss my 240. I was at a stop light when I heard a loud bang behind me. It was a minivan that had just been rearended by one of those huge Dodge Ram pickups doing around 50 mph. So, with less than an oil change to go before hitting 300,000 miles, my 240 was sandwiched beteen the minivan and a pickup truck in front of me. That was a great car, and my first Benz. I would go for a 240 with a manual trans. over a normally aspirated 300. The 300 is nice and has enough power to get you onto highways without needing to make a reservation beforhand. But like others have noted, it has more stuff that can go bad. I don't remember having all those vacuum hoses on the 240 which have been very expensive to work on in the 300. Go with the 240 and a manual transmission- simple, better fuel milage, and a rock solid car! (I'm still not giving up my diesel, though-- it's a great commuter car! Hope my .02 helps some.

Sflori, Ok it sounds like you would vote for putting a 300 into a 240 123 then (?). As compared to having a 300 in a 300 due to the increased doodads controlled by vacuum ?.... My 240 has roll up windows, no sunroof, manual AC. But do have to make reservations when wanting to get on the interstate highway... you think with a normally aspirated 300 this might be the perfect car ? I have a low mileage (300) engine already and something which is causing excessive oil burning in the 240...... Greg
_____________________
1980 240d
110K 300 1979 TD engine in yard

Greg,

If you want to make the swap, I can see if my highschool classmate in the Fatherland is able to find you a 300D (non-turbo) 5-speed transmission for your conversion, if you would like. He is presently looking for some new cloth seat coverings for one of the 230E's he and I brought into the country that belongs to my Aunt. Finding the odd part and shipping it to me seems to be an interesting distraction for him, but if he finds one, and he will, I want to make sure he is not wasting his time. 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)

1. Not sure about that. Silicon doesn't mess up the rubber but I've never tried it myself to see how effective it is.

2. Does the car start fine when it goes off? Mine quite a long time ago and I just let 'em warm up for a few seconds and that car startef fine. For people who might drive the car and don't know that I hooked the seat belt light up to the glow plug slot and told 'em to wait until it went out.

3. All the locks are pneumatic and on the same circuit. Most likely they started leaking and so someone plugged 'em. You can either replace the diaphrams or leave them plugged. Worse case you have manual accesories like the 240.

4. The car should normally starts out in second gear unless you floor it. If you floor it, it will kick down to first and will really rev it until it shifts. I always just held it to the floor to get the revs up faster thus shifting sooner 'cause my car seemed to shift awkwardly if I let up. I don't know if this is normal though.

Frank.

__________________
'82 300SD