'72 220D vs. '85 300D Turbo
 

I need advice. While looking at the local used MB market in my area I've found two cars, both are $1,000 and both have ONLY minor right rear body damage - not too bad. One car is a 1972 220D the other is a 1985 300D Turbo - I've been looking for a diesel. I know the history of the '72 220 and am trying to get info on the '85.
Any opinions out there?
NOTE: original posting was incorrectly said to be a '78 240D.

[Edited by debi on 07-09-2001 at 03:57 PM]

You know the history of this '78 240D in PARTICULAR, or the general history of all such 240D's? I have an '84 300D and it's reliable, relatively fast, and very comfortable. She gets about 25mpg in the city, 27mpg on the highway. Difficult to say too many good things about this car!

220D is getting pretty far over the hill. I think parts will be a lot easier to find and probably cheaper on the 300D. Most 220D's out there are pretty much run into the ground.