THe 1995 E300 should not be much slower than the 2.5T, spec is about 1 second slower to 60mph (about 12.5 instead of 11.5 for the 2.5 turbo, or 10.5 for the 3.0 turbo.) The W123.133 (older 300D turbo) is around 14.0 seconds.

That said, it depends what you want. Feel the need for speed? Get a 1987 mint condition, preferably with new head, or budget in $3k for a future head job. The power is addicting. But you may need to spend MONTHS finding the right car, and it's guaranteed to be on the "wrong" coast relative to where you live. You can swap on most of the late-model goodies to make the 1987 more plush, like leather/wood door panels, etc... I've done that to mine and I love it. (see photos by clicking the 'www' button below.)

If you want peak fuel economy, and maybe some more cosmetic bling and/or interior comforts/features, the 2.5T or E300 are good alternatives (but at higher cost). The benefit here is that it should be easier to find one in good shape, possibly local. The 87's are rare, the 90-95 are not (well, relatively not rare, compared to the 87 anyway.)

There was never a turbo 606 engine installed in a W124, ever, anywhere. The one on eBay is a stock non-turbo. That model got the vented right fender for looks I guess.

Side note: Mercedes brakes are directly related to the engine power output. The E-class with the M104 engines (93-up) got larger brakes, as did the M119 (1992-up V8). The diesels did NOT, they use the same as the original 87 300D. The only viable upgrade is, IMO, the early 500E brakes which I am in the process of doing on my car.

__________________
Check out my website photos, documents, and movies!

My '93 2.5 has R-134, gets 34-35 mpg on the highway, is in excellent condition and is truly a pleasure to drive! I have told my wife that I wished they still made these - I would want to buy another. It is a little slow off the line, but is a great highway cruiser. I also have the headlight washers and the MB Tex interior that looks new. No cracks in the wood, carpet like new, etc. I couldn't be happier and it is great to read that many of you are getting long service from yours. I would love to keep this car for several years. I also have done some minor maintenance myself (oil change/transmission fluid change, air/fuel filters, etc) and find it is relatively easy on this car.

__________________
John Gillespie
1988 560sec - 192k miles
2006 CLK500 - 40K miles
1995 E300 - 202k miles

John, if your 2.5T is a little slow off the line, consider tweaking the ALDA a bit. If there's no change, just turn it back to where it was. If you live it high elevation (much above ~3000ft) there's probably not much you can do though.

__________________
Check out my website photos, documents, and movies!

If straight line performance is your most important criteria, don't buy diesel, the newest ones are quick but expensive, 98-99, 0-60 8.5 seconds, e320cdi 6.9 seconds, price range mid teens to well over 50k. I have to laugh at those who suggest the previous cars were FAST, slower to a lesser degree maybe.
If you like fast consider an e55 amg some are selling for less than the asking price of some 99 e300s. less than 30k. You will be very happy.
I have a 2004 e55amg and a 05 e320cdi, and while I marvel at the refinement and performance of the newest diesel, a performance car it is not. By the way at steady state 75 mph the amg has delivered 27mpg, not bad for 469hp. Compare that with the cdi under the same conditions at 37mpg, pretty impressive for both cars, but if I had to make a choice and only keep two, I would keep the 93 300d and the E55 AMG.

There was never a turbo 606 engine installed in a W124, ever, anywhere. The one on eBay is a stock non-turbo. That model got the vented right fender for looks I guess.

Doh! As usual, gsxr is correct. I had read a false ebay advertisement awhile ago about the '95 limited edition being a turbo and not scrutinizing the pic, I assummed the crossover pipe was coming from a turbo, not the air filter box. I've been keeping an eye out for these models on ebay and traderonline and after I went back through the saved pics, I realized I have been a sucker! I can hear old pop right now, "If you assume, it just makes an a_s out of ..... blah, blah, blah"

I'm resurrecting this thread as I'm beginning to covet a W124 300D 2.5!!

I've seen some truly gorgeous ones on eBay. The white with grey mb-tex seems to be a popular combination. I like it!

I currently have two VW TDIs. They are great, but my commute is getting tough and my Golf 5M often seems more of a chore than a joy to drive under these circumstances.

I know these engines are bulletproof, but what about the transmissions? What about electricals?

I DIY everything on our two cars save the timing belts. How hard are these cars to maintain?

Your thoughts would be most welcomed!!

__________________
2000 VW Golf TDI 5M 216K mi
2000 VW Jetta TDI-A 250K mi

I was told by a MB dealer in town that Mercedes paid less warranty claims on the 1995 E300 Diesel than any other

so the car must be pretty bulletproof at leat in the first 50K miles anyway

Attached Thumbnails

 

anyone know how many of the 2.5 turbos had ASD? (auto locking rear diff) Is it a common option?

Mine has ASD. To be honest with you, I really wish it didn't have this option. If you happen to have this option, you will notice some extra hydraulic hoses and a hydraulic tank that sits on the left wheelwell. The power steering pump doubles up as the pump to pump fluid to the rear differential when the ASD system is activated. Also, if you happen to have your car up in the air, close to the differential, you will see the electronic valving mechanisms that send the fluid to the rear differential.....seems highly complicated.

Herb
'82 240D
'87 300SDL
'92 300D 2.5 Turbo

Hey,

I'd say the 300D 2.5 is the best all around diesel, speed, economy, stealth (volume), and the 87 300 SDL is the best luxury. I think gaining 5 or 6 years on that rusty bolt that's going to break off when you try to take it out is worth consideration as well.

I had a 80 300D, 87 300 SDL, and now a 92 300D 2.5 Turbo. The 80 sucked to work on due to breaking or un-siezing everything that was supposed to come out.

Tranny also might be better in the 2.5 vs older....

-m

__________________
Now:
2018 Tesla Model X
1999 S500 Grand Edition 164k
1992 300D 2.5 Turbo 287k
2005 E320 4MATIC wagon
1991 Alfa Romeo 164L 99k (sleeping for a while)

Then: 96 Lincoln TC, 93 Lincoln TC, 87 560 SEL, 87 300 SDL, 80 300D, 89 560 SEC

Didn't the 95 model have a limited edition version with the turbo 606?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2486280743&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
Note the vent on the passenger front corner.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2484417972&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
I really would have loved to have this silver one.

Out of all the Mercedes diesels I have owned(78-240d, 82 300D, 85 300TDT, 87 300SDL, (2) 93 2.5T,
1991 SDL, 1998, 1999, E300, 05 E320CDI. In my opinion you simply cannot beat a 2.5Turbo. Very high build quality and materials, good overall performance, outstanding reliability and fuel consumption 33plus under any conditions, 93s had dual airbags, abs, etc. Lots and lots of them still running around European capitals in current taxi service. I recently talked to a cabbie in Amsterdam who has been driving Mercedes diesels his 30 plus year driving career and his taxi and personal car are 124 2.5 cars. He believes they are the best cars Mercedes has EVER made, I would agree, One has over 750,000 miles, simply bulletproof.

Just install an intercooler into a 603 like that on the 606, advance the fuel, and you'll have a 606(power-wise) that is completely mechanical(no ECU).

If you're handy, of course, ask Mosselmann. You can also go the 350 - 430 + hp route of the Finnish by installing a better breathing exhaust, monster turbo, and massive intercooler. Humiliate 500E's, and take on some E55 Kompressors.

So the W140 turbo 606 has an intercooler?

Yes, the OM606 turbo has an intercooler, albeit a small one.