Hello. After years of owning 123 diesels, I may be coming to the end of that string. I've noticed that mid-90's 300 series cars are not terribly expensive, and am wondering they make a fitting replacement for a 300d. I have the following questions: '81 300d has a 5spd manual, which I like, but...
4) does a diesel get much better mileage? I think that higher diesel prices are with us permanently. Here I pay a 15% premium for diesel over regular gas, and so the mileage difference would have to be at least that.
5) Are the sedans a lot nicer to drive than the wagons? I have kids, and they have friends, and they like to go skiing, and we go on periodic road trips.
6) Are there any years, models, types that you'd particularly seek out, or avoid.
7) Given that I live up here in the land of road salt, and the car will also spend some time riding on ferryboats, are they pretty well sorted out for rust? Compared to the 123?
I have to admit that I also have looked at a Ford Crown Vic. Not the most sophisticated vehicle on earth, but they'll tow a boat, and it's funny how eveybody gets out of your way on the highway. Almost like you were a cop.
I've also kept an eye on Cadillac Cateras. The last couple years of them are supposed to be pretty well sorted out, and it is a sort of German car for not a lot of money. With the additional benefit that I can swagger around like a loudmouth Rotarian, and everyone will blame it on the car.
Thanks for any input, advice, jokes, etc.
seo

4) The premium you pay for a Diesel car these days means a lot of miles before a Diesel makes better economic sense than a comparable gasser. Consider that a typcial 96 E300d costs $12,000 vs a similar 96 E320 at $8,000. How many miles/years before you make up $4000? Not to mention you have your choice of E320s vs the two or three 200K mile E300d's available to you.

5) The 90s E-class (124 and 210) are steps above the 123 in refinement and IMO worthy successors to the 123. I don't think you can push a wagon as hard as you can push a sedan but you probably wouldn't drive that way with a full load.

6) Diesels were sold in the US in the 95-99 model years. No Diesel wagons in those years. Possibly no wagon in 96.

7) The 98-99 E300 turbodiesel is a heck of a ride Talk to experts about the propensity of 96-up cars to have front suspension towers come apart from corossion. I don't know if that means 96-99 cars should be avoided in your situation. If you're thinking Diesel, I'll not go into the V8 and AMG versions. If you get a later car, definitely go for Xenon headlights.

Sixto
93 300SD

As for rust, the W124 chassis features galvanized sheetmetal, the doors and hood/trunk are galvanized (not sure about the roof) so they tend not to be rustbuckets.

__________________
08 W251 R350
97 W210 E320
91 W124 300E
86 W126 560SEL
85 W126 380SE Silver
85 W126 380SE Cranberry
79 W123 250
78 W123 280E
75 W114 280

Thanks for these comments. I wonder what happened to questions 1-3? Got snipped somewhere along the line.
#2 was a question about 4-matic. Living in Maine, on two-lane roads with steep pitches and ice/snow, I like the idea. But from what little I've seen, this is a technology that should be left to Audi, who everybody expects to be unreliable, over-priced, and short-lived. Am I being unfair? Is the 4-matic really bulletproof?
seo

I've read techs comment that 124 4Matic is leak prone and costly to repair. The simpler 210 4Matic is supposedly more robust. There are 4Matic sedans and wagons but no 4Matic Diesels sold in the US.

Sixto
93 300SD

I have a 90 300TE 4Matic and my father has a 90 300E 4Matic. When everything is working I love the 300TE, but the 4Matic has been a problem. It worked last year throughout the winter on many ski trips and numerous snows. On snowy roads the 300TE handled better than any four wheel drive I've owned. We went to Gunstock last winter going 80 mph on the highways but had plenty of traction on the snowy back roads.

From what I understand a hydraulic clutch engages the 4wd when a wheel slips is sensed. There is a seal on that clutch that leaks the clutch's hydraulic fluid into the transfer case. If the clutch hydraulics can't maintain pressure the computer generates an error and the 4wd stops working. On snowy roads without 4wd it has the worst traction of any car of owned.

Another failure mode appears to the steering angle sensor. The 4Matic uses this to calculate the difference in wheel speeds between either side of the car when in a turn. When this goes bad at best the 4wd engages in every turn. At worst the 4matic quites working all together (Yellow recangular 4Matic light is on). The 300TE has had this problem for some time and the 300E is showing this failure mode on occasion.

Bottom line is I'd stay away from the years that have this design of 4Matic. I've heard the second generation fixed all of these porblems, but I don't what year that changed.

Mid 90's 300's are chiseled out of granite. The suspension seems tuned from the gods, literally is as comfortable at 120 as it is at 70, while it's snow abilities inspire more confidence than most front-wheel vehicles I've driven. It's just one of those cars they got right the first time.

Wagons are scare and you'll pay a premium. But don't expect any rear passenger to be happy for long. Kids will get a kick out of the rearview though.

My friend has a 20yr old 300E that has seen every Chicago winter. 2yrs ago he fixed a little rust around the jackpoints, it was only surface rust. Otherwise the car wears its original paint. I also have a few family members with 300E's and D's, not one of them has had a complaint. Although my Florida aunt did have the multilink rear suspension's bushings replaced, a $1200-ish job. But that was an early '87-'88 model w/ 200k miles.

Diesel cars drawing a premium, so yeah, economically makes sense to grab a gasser instead. But some of us are willing to pay that premium just for the range of the diesel, nothing like a couple extra weeks of not having to fill up. I've always liked diesels over gassers b/c they're easier to sell when over 100,ooo miles. No one bats an eye at a used 200k diesel.

__________________
'64 230SL

Seo,

You've received some good info on the 4 Matic system... frankly I don't know much about it. Except that living in Southern Maine, I can tell you that it's not necessary. With 4 studdless snow tires on my 201 (just plain old rear wheel drive), I'm passing FWD and AWD cars/SUVs on I-95. Not because I drive like a moron, but because my car's handling is stable and predictable due in part to it's even distribution of weight.

In my humble opinion, save yourself the potential headache and expense of the 4 Matic system, and invest $400 - $500 in a good set of snow tires on dedicated rims. It's money well spent.

Just my 2 cents... arguably worth that.

Jeff Pierce

__________________
Jeff Pierce

Current Vehicles:
'92 Mercedes 190E/2.3 (247K miles/my daily driver)
'93 Volvo 940 Turbo Wagon (263K miles/a family truckster with spunk)
'99 Kawasaki Concours
Gravely 8120
Previous Vehicles:
'85 Jeep CJ-7 w/ Fisher plow (226K miles)'93 Volvo 940 Turbo Wagon
'53 Willys-Overland Pickup
'85 Honda 750F Interceptor
'93 Nissan Quest
'89 Toyota Camry Wagon
'89 Dodge Raider
'81 Honda CB 750F Super Sport
'88 Toyota Celica
'95 Toyota Tacoma
'74 Honda CB 550F

Thanks for that advice. I'm suspicious of extra machinery. Over the last 12 years I've found my 123's to be pretty good snow cars. Okay on slippery roads, not good in deeper going, where it's too low and wide. In the good old days I drove a Volvo 122 with 195 tires, and it would just about plow snow. It had a lot of clearance, short wheelbase and overhangs, and a narrow track. Then and now, I spend a lot of time driving on very marginal roads.
These days, on really snowy occasions I drive my pickup truck. With an 8' plow on the front and a ton of sand in the box, it has plenty of traction. It also has a better wiper/defroster system than a Mercedes, I'm sorry to say.
seo