1993 300e or 1991 300e
 

Hello there fellow mercedesshoppers, I have been in hot pursuit of an early 90's 124, specifically 300e in white or beige. After a few months and searching and searching, I am torn between two lovers...... now as always I seek the counsel of my fellow mercedesshoppers. First one is this 93 on ebay with 87000 miles , runs good everything works ,nothing needed.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6330&item=4561112606&rd=1

Second one is a 91 from a local guy who had it on ebay a few weeks ago but it didn't get to reserve, it has 129000 runs good , good interior, only thing I noticed when I drove it, is that oil pressure gauge was not working..., I checked and oil was fine. this guy wants $4500 and no less. Both of these cars look exactly the same and are in about the same condition. I know the 93's engine was slightly different.
Which is the better engine ? The 91 or 93 all other things being equal... except the mileage and the oil pressure gauge (oops .. I guess all other things are not equal) Help!!!!!!!!!!???

I would go with the '91 just to stay with the simpler single overhead cam engine and to stay away from the wiring harness issues.

The 93 2.8 was on ebay 4 times in the last couple of months. I am wonder why?
In my oppinion the 2.8 is a great car (if this example proven to be ok)
I have a 2,8 with 190k and is great...fuel economy vs. power

I have a M103 but would probably prefer a M104 engine for the future. The injection managment seems way easier to deal with than the finicky KE-III with its idle, stalling and hesitation problems etc. Also, more power and better fuel economy isn't bad either, is it?
Bruno

ok so, so far the main issue with the 104 is the wire harness, I will take that very seriously. No.2 So this car has been on ebay a few times before, that I must say is kind of scary.... So far I am leaning to the 91, what do you all think is the deal with the oil pressure gauge, might need a new one? oil pressure sender bad? Did these particularly have any issues on these cars?
By the way can I say it again!!!!! I love this site!!!

I took a look at the link and something looks wrong with the lower panels. I don't know if it's just a bad picture, but the lower panels don't look like they're aligned.

If you are planing on getting the M104 engine, I would suggest you go with a 95.

Otherwise stick with the M103...get the highest year (92?) with lowest miles. Most impotantly get the one with that was best cared for. Since these cars are getting old, maintenance is the key. If the car wasn't maintained on a regular basis, expect a lot of repairs.

Funny, I haven't noticed any finicky problems with my car at all....no stalling, (undiagnosed) hesitation problems or what not....The KE-III system is actually very easy to maintain and diagnose, all you need is a multimeter that reads duty cycle, temperature, ohms and voltage, and the factory service manual..... As compared to the wiring harness issue with the M104 that could result in all number of problems that are very hard to diagnose. Of course the fix for this doesn't seem difficult, just expensive for the part....Personally, as a DIYer I think that the M103 is a better motor to maintain and work on...Not that I'd snub my nose at the M104 and hesitate to work on it either.

Another issue for me is that the 2.8 M104 was only made for what? One production year? My personal preference is for the tried and true...and for which finding parts for is never a problem. The Mercedes E-Class Owner's Bible lists the 91 and 92 motors to be the most 'sorted out', with issues like oil consumption addressed by switching to Viton valve seals, and changing the material of the valve guides to prevent excessive wear. Both M103 and 104 motors can suffer from leaky timing chain covers, and both can develope a head gasket leak where the motor blows oil into the coolant. (Mine did, fixed now)

It sounds like the sender for the oil pressure gauge is broken, or the wire to the sender is disconnected or shorted...I would insist on fixing that first, ($65 part) and have the car inspected by a local mechanic. Can the 91 owner produce maintenance records?

Bottom line for me is that you can go and inspect the 91 and confirm its condition. With the 93 on eBay, caveat emptor. It could be a perfectly good car, but how can you tell for sure?

I would go with a 91 or look even harder for a 92.

Then drive it and enjoy it..... and a few years down the road, look for a 94 or 95 that has had the harness and evaporator replaced.

I would not buy either unless I could review the maintenance history of each and have a Pre-Purchase inspection done. For instance, how do you know whether these cars have used the correct MB anti-freeze? Oil changes? Transmission serviced regularly? There are predictable things that these cars need in a mileage range between say 90K and 150K. How do I know this?

I have a '92 300E (purchased at about 100K) with 225K, a '93 with 254K and had a '90 (purchased at 100K) with 175K when traded. The '92 and '93 are both factory Sportlines. All needed, A/C compressor, mufflers, '93 had wiring harness and evaporator done, '90 needed valve seals, all had belt tensioners replaced, radiators, all had head gaskets done, etc. etc. The '92 had $6,500 worth of receipts in the year prior to my purchasing it at 100K miles. The '93 has receipts for $36,000 of repairs, 1 owner and serviced at a Dealer.

I would rather pay more up front for a car that has had a lot of these items repaired/replaced.

I have found that while the '93 is faster, it is also less linear. The power comes on at high revs. The '93 is less smooth from a stop. I think this is due to the Hot Film system. '92 is a simpler engine. I prefer the M103 to the M104.

Just my 2 cents,

Steve

I would consider the main issue with the 104 to be the headgasket. The harness is a piece of cake compared to it.

I prefer the M103. And I actually think the interior of my 89 is of higher quality than my 92.

I would go with the 91
 

I currently own a 91 and before i bought it i had looked and compared 300E's for years before deciding on this car. I can personally sar for a car with a little over 200,000 mi. I have not had any problem other than a blown head gasket. besides, when it comes to repair work for a DIYer, the 91 300E is easy to work on.

on the ebay listing, the door sticker reads "chrysler corporation" and made in US. is that true ? were the 93 w124's taken over by chrylser and being built in the US ?

I doubt that.
AFAIK, the first US built MB was the ML.
I forget the exact year of the Daimler / Chrysler merger, but it was long after 1993.
Probably someone added this sticker to be funny or something...

I like my 1991 300TE, but it's had its share of repairs... head gasket, radiator, monovalve, ignition tumbler, O2 sensor, fuel distributor (bought used one on Ebay, still not right, but only affects cold starting and fuel economy somewhat), voltage regulator, aux fans, both rear and center mufflers, and last but not least, the oil pressure sender.
I had read on this forum that oil pressure senders are a common problem in the M103, so I bought a new one and had my indy replace it.
Something unnerving about the guage showing zero oil pressure below 1500 rpm. :eek:

Not doing a lot of work myself I've probably sunken about $5K into my TE, in about 2 1/2 years.

The upside is that I love driving it, it just loves to fly along down the road :)

About Chrysler Corp. Sticker
 

I too was curious about the chrysler sticker... It looks like a goof. Here is the vin from the sticker.

VIN: 1J4FT28SXPL641484
Year/Make/Model: 1993 JEEP CHEROKEE
Body Style: 4 Dr. Wagon/Sport Utility
Engine Type: 4.0L L6 HO MPI
Manufactured In: UNITED STATES