Just wanted to trade some thoughts on this model. Most of the 126 conversation seem to be diesel powered and the 103 stuff is usually related 124 cars.

I've had mine for about 8 years now. Done head job, most of the front end has been rebuilt, AC gone through (still R12), bunch of CIS stuff (EHA, ECM etc).

I get around 21mpg on the free way at an 80 mph cruise. Top end, which I've only attempted once, seems to be around 130. Who knows how accurate the speedo is.

I've found that the 103 motor is very sensitive to mixture adjustment.

A clean airfilter maikes a big difference.

Some feel the car is underpowered, but that really depends on what your frame of reference is.... If you are coming out of a Porsche, then yes, its slow. If you are used to 617 powered cars, its pretty fast.

I replaced my radio witha blaupunkt toronto. If you hate the new flashy radios, that seem like they are designed by high school kids, this is the unit for you. The display is color changeable and matches the interior lighting PERFECTLY. Looks totally factory stock. Catch is, that they only made this model for a year or so, so used units have actually appreciated.

My only serious gripe with the car is the second gear start, and the suspension is very sensitive to tires- they must be balanced perfectly.

Thoughts?

__________________
'90 300SE 298k
-300K and it gets put into retirement.
'80 300D 255k Purchased new by family in 1980.

Had a:
1973 220 (gas)
1980 300SD
1992 400E

I recently bought an Alpine that allows you to change the color of the button lights. CDE-9845

The 300 isn't much off the line...it's a heavy car with a 3.0L engine. Once it gets rolling, though, it's plenty quick. I'd like to torture the guy who came up with the second-gear start, though.

__________________
1989 300 SEL that mostly works, but needs TLC

i bought a 1990 300se last month and drove it back from mass to pa. i was not disappointed with the power and the ride is unsurpassed. fuel economy for two tanks of gas was 20.5 mpg combined city/hwy which i thought was really good. good tip on the radio.

__________________
0o==o0

James 4:8

"...let us put aside the blindness of mind of those who can conceive of nothing higher than what is known through the senses"
-Saint Gregory Palamas, ---Discourse on the Holy Transfiguration of Our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ


Centrally located in North East Central Pa.

I was sorely tempted to get a 300 SEL when I was looking for the SDL. The cost of a 1991 300 SEL was about $2K less than this one. Probably better condition as well.

I couldn't bring myself to do it because of three things, all related:

----the second gear start
----the 3.65 (approx?) axle
----the 20 mpg fuel economy

I've always dreamed that I would take this vehicle, figure out a way to install that kit that allows a first gear start and then put a 2.88 rear axle in it. It would have the same feel off the line, with first gear utilized, and it would drop it's rpm's by about 700 rpm out on the highway. I'll bet that would be good for another 3 mpg. Now you have a vehicle getting almost 24 mpg. The SDL consistently gets 29 mpg, but, the $2K price difference pays for the additional fuel for about 8 years!

A few ways to get first gear start:

Install the valve body from a ~'91-'92 300E. Don't know exactly when they changed the part, but it will give you FGS. Plug and play unless there is something I dont know.

Install 5spd manual trans. Was offered from the factory on the 260SE/300SE/L cars in other countries, so its a stock setup. There was a buying guide in Mercedes Enthusiast magazine and the editors drove a 5spd 300SE. Commented that the car was much quicker than the auto.

Solution number one is obviously the easiest. The problem is that first gear start with this transmission is very akward. Shifts hard and is not linear like the other gears.

If there was another auto transmission that would bolt up, I'd love to know, hint hint.

The rear end is a 3.46. Spins about 3400rpm at 70 mph. This seems to be a bit more than the diesels, but the 103 motor also spins up to 6500rpm [retty easily, whereas the diesels 603 hit 5000rpm or so(?). Personally, I prefer cars that turn high RPM on the freeway. Better engine braking, better throttle response, and I like to hear the motor work. 103 motor makes great sounds- nice gutteral, metallic purr. I can't stand driving cars that loaf along at 1200 rpm anymore. Very uninvolved, and the car is always shifting back and forth...ugh.

"The SDL consistently gets 29 mpg, but, the $2K price difference pays for the additional fuel for about 8 years!"

Agreed. I've pointed this out to the hardcore dieselers before, but never got much of a response. Not sure why people insist on the extra 10mpg, when it costs at least $2,000 (at LEAST) more to get chassis with the diesel. On top of that, 103 parts are more plentiful and cheaper. Not knocking diesels (I have one of course), I just think the perceived difference in running costs and longevity is an illusion. I'd consider an SDL, but to find one in decent shape seems really tough/expensive. That said, there is an intangible quality with the diesel

Thanks for the responses.

__________________
'90 300SE 298k
-300K and it gets put into retirement.
'80 300D 255k Purchased new by family in 1980.

Had a:
1973 220 (gas)
1980 300SD
1992 400E

With the 2.88, the M103 would be turning 2830 rpm at 70 mph, just about the same as the SDL. I think it's closer to 3K, but the gauges might be off slightly.

So, 2830 rpm is still turning more than fast enough for decent highway performance. It's certainly no screamer, but, you could downshift it to third, if nccessary. It would be turning approx. 4200 rpm, which is fine for the gasser.
Would give you nearly 50% more torque to the pavement at this speed.

The whole idea of a 2.88 in the 300 SEL intrigues me.

What about that kit that is offered to get a first gear start? It might only work with the V8's however.

Under the same foot, mine, a 91 300SE and a 95 S420 get ~20mpg on the highway. The 300SE does better creeping around town but second gear isn't as noticeable in the S420.

My beef with Bosch KE5 is that there's always something or other preventing a glass smooth idle. Wonderful at speed but I couldn't get the idle to be MB smooth. Neither could a couple of indies without free reign to diagnose. Maybe it was lack of skill but the S420 idles smoothly and the SDL is pretty darn smooth too given the same lack of skill.

Why did MB use a canister filter instead of a cartridge filter in the 300SE? There was always some drip to wipe when replacing the filter. And why did MB make the engine so easy to work on then bury the water pump behind the belt tensioner? At least MB 'fixed' these problems in the OM603

Sixto
95 S420
87 300SDL

I agree with you on all points. I remember you wrote up a comparison between your 300se and sdl for me a few years back.

Not sure why they stuck with a spin on filter..makes a little mess, although I've gotten pretty pretty good at minimizing the mess.

My idle is 90% of what I expect it to be. Motor mounts don't last very long..at least the passenger side one doesn't.

Anyone compared a 300SE with a 300SEL? Weight diff? I would like to try a long wheelbase S class, but I am curious as to how much slower they longer car is, if at all?

__________________
'90 300SE 298k
-300K and it gets put into retirement.
'80 300D 255k Purchased new by family in 1980.

Had a:
1973 220 (gas)
1980 300SD
1992 400E

If you were to go LWB I would think the V8 420 would be a safe choice. It is every bit as easy to work on as the M103, and it gets the same fuel economy with more power. There is a lot more torque down low to cloud that annoying 2nd gear start. Enough that it isn't a concern to most.

The 300SE NEEDS the 3.46 differential, imho. A 3.46 to a 2.88 with first gear start is essentially like a 3.46 with no first gear start, but an overdrive. The M103 has a really weak lower end, unlike the M116/117. It needs to be near the bulk of it's torque.

With the 3.46 the 300SE seems quite spritely and can run with the best of them. Top speed is 210 km/h in Europe, so ~130 mph here. Whenever you take off in it, depress the accelerator 1/4 pedal quickly and firmly and it will step off smartly in 1st everytime. Or play with the shifter method "D - 2 - D"(of which I find too much of a nuisance to initiate often).

__________________
1987 300SDL (324000)

1986 Porsche 951 (944 Turbo) (166000)

1978 Porsche 924 (99000)

1996 Nissan Pathfinder R50 (201000)

Torturing is too good for the bozo that thought up the second gear start. The way the car is geared makes first gear unusable and starting in second is very slow. My one and only complaint about the car.

__________________
I'm sick of .sig files

Yeah...it's all or nothing off the line. If I get on the skinny pedal enough to get first gear, it'll chirp the tires going into second. I've heard changing the valve body will give first-gear starts, but I'm not gonna do that until I have to go into the trans for other reasons. Mayhaps when it's time for the fluid and filter change.

__________________
1989 300 SEL that mostly works, but needs TLC