model pref? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

javven · #1 07-05-2003, 08:03 PM

I'm looking into getting a 617MB, early 80's or late 70's. We had one several years ago (a 79) but the chain was never done and at 180 it blew up

Unfortunately the car was being driven at 90mph or so at the time (not hard - just crusing through MT) and ker-blewie.

One dead MB.

So, I'm looking again for one. This time I'll probably swap the chain right off unless the prior owner has a bill of sale for doing it in the last 50K miles (figure they're an 80-120K item).

Anyhow - what should I look for? We had a 300TD, but I understand the newer ones are turbocharged? I'm not a big turbo fan (no pun intended) as it's just more parts to blow up to me. I've read here that you guys seem to pref the 126 over the 123 chassis - slightly. Is the TD a 126? I can't remember anymore?

The only thing leaning me to a 123 is it seems to be easier to find them with manual gearboxes (huge plus to me - eyeing the slush-box on my volvo now...). 300SD and TD's seem to ALL be auto around here.

I still kick myself for not getting the 83 123 manual I saw earlier this year. It was in what I'd deem 85% of original condition, with 89K miles. $2700.

Should I still be able to find a car in that condition at that price? Yes or no - should I look for a different model?

#2 07-05-2003, 10:29 PM

If you want a non-turbo W123 300D, then I would suggest a 1981 model, since that is the only year with the updated ACC. I would suggest that you look for a model with a turbo, because I think you might be more happy with it. I wish that I would have bought a car with a turbo, since my n/a 300CD can be a dog at times, and the turbo would fix the problem for me.

BoostnBenz · #3 07-06-2003, 12:20 AM

Myself I can't even imagine having a nonturbo W123. I hear 1982 (refering to 300D) was the first year they were built on an assembly line. There were minor changes in 83 and 84. In 1985 they changed the rear end gearing a little bit for better highway mileage. It also seems that most of the late 70s couldn't of been as good as the early 80s because as I go through the manual I always see stuff saying that this was upraded for 7X and newer....

My turbo in this car hasn't given me any problems, for the price used I could care less anyway. TD is a W123, it is the station wagon version of the 300D. W126 is the 300SD, little longer, bigger, heavier, more luxurious version of the 300D. It was just to big for me, bordering land yacht IMO. You should be able to find a pretty nice W123 for the $3k area, but I wouldn't keep hopes up of finding with quite that few of miles in that condition.

Brian Carlton · #4 07-06-2003, 09:34 AM

I had the 123, turbocharged, for about five years and, last year sold it and purchased the 126. Both vehicles have about 125 hp with the turbo. I believe that you definitely will want a turbocharger when moving 3400-3800 lbs. of machine with only 125 hp on tap. Even with the turbo, you get routinely blown off the road by any rice burner with over 200 hp with weight that is around 3000 lb. But I just let them go.

Most of us do not have any turbo problems. Changing the oil frequently and allowing the turbo to cool a bit after stopping on a really hot day are the two critical items.

With regards to the comparisons between the 123 and 126, the 123 is definitely easier to work on in several areas and easier to park in tight quarters. The 126 is far more comfortable on long trips and, since I am 6'4", personally, it fits me much better.

You should drive them both. It is a bit of a personal thing.

Brian Carlton
1984 300SD

240Demon · #5 07-06-2003, 06:19 PM

The turbo 300D is good to have. The W123 cars got better as time went on. An 82-85 car would be your best bet...however...you will not find anything 300D with a stick shift unless it is a gray market car (privately imported) and then those cars are normally aspirated. I have driven a 1984 300D 4spd car, and even with the normal aspiration, the car was just fine. So...If you can find a gray market car, go for it, but otherwise, get a turbo automatic...the performance is pretty close to the same between the stick/non-turbo and the auto/turbo.

BoostnBenz · #6 07-06-2003, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brian Carlton
With regards to the comparisons between the 123 and 126, the 123 is definitely easier to work on in several areas and easier to park in tight quarters. The 126 is far more comfortable on long trips and, since I am 6'4", personally, it fits me much better.

Just out of curiousity what about the 300D seemed much different sizewise versus the 300SD? I'm 6'1" and when driving my talon I know when I need a hair cut as it'll keep hitting the headliner until I get one.

However in my 300D I don't have that problem or even close to. My 300D almost makes me feel small in the fact that most cars I run the seat all the way back then up a notch or so, where as in my 300D I don't think I'm anywhere near that far back.

I believe the W126 has a 6cyl diesel which puts out a little more power (140hp?) than the 125hp W123 5cyl, then again I don't know much of anything about the W126....

I don't know about that 240Demon, just seems hard to believe that a car with only 60% of the turbo one would feel the same. To bad there aren't any or at least many with a turbo stick.

Brian Carlton · #7 07-07-2003, 07:45 AM

When sitting in the W123, with the seat at the proper position for my height (6' 4 "), my left arm does not rest comfortably on the door arm rest. The arm rest is too far forward. Also, the door seems to intrude into my space. I would have preferred the car to be a bit wider. The legroom, however, is more than sufficient. In fact, the seat does not need to go all the way back. The headroom was also sufficient. Now, on the W126, these little nitpicks all go away. The seat is perfect and the arm rests are perfect. Furthermore, you can get just the position you prefer because of the electric adjustments to the seat. These may seem like little petty annoyances with the W123, and they are. In fact, I had the W123 for five years and did not even have a problem with them. However, I realized, immediately, the differences when I purchased the W126.

With regard to the engine, both vehicles have exactly the same five cylinder engine up through 1985. The last year of the W123 was 1985 and the last year of the five cylinder in the W126 was 1985. In 1986, the six cylinder was offered in the W126 and, yes, it does have quite a bit more power.

Brian Carlton
1984 300 SD

BoostnBenz · #8 07-08-2003, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brian Carlton
When sitting in the W123, with the seat at the proper position for my height (6' 4 "), my left arm does not rest comfortably on the door arm rest. The arm rest is too far forward.

Actually I noticed the same thing, I normally just rest my arm on top of the door panel because of this. Not incredibly comfortable, but better than most cars I'm in.

While I'm sure it is just petty, it is the little things that make a big difference, but I still would rather have my W123.

I didn't know that about the W126 motors, thanks.

300SDog · #9 07-08-2003, 06:26 AM

Interesting comparison of body styles.... am surprised nobody has mentioned the late '70s 116 as having most humongous interior space of all MBs from the last 30 yrs, except maybe the early '70s 108 with unmatched interior features

116 also has extra wide door trim designed as arm rest with window down..... and dashboard seems miles away from seating position, with plenty of room for 250 lb, 6 ft fatties like me......

Driver and passenger have enough room to share pizza while car tracks like its on rails, can vouche for that.