I came across a quote from the Oct. 2002 issue of Mercedes Enthusiast:

"The only motor with a history of problems is the M104.992 3.2 liter, which is prone to oil leaks from the cylinder-head gasket. This is common whether this engine is installed in an E-class, S-class, or SL."

Comments?

If this is the case, I would definitely be more attracted to the earlier 104.980 3.0 liter engine, especially since I don't mind the styling differences with the later 124s. On the other hand, the increased 34 ft-lbs in the 3.2L engine is certainly an advantage.

"Only motor with a history of problem" sounds a bit out of context, or the author is a lunatic. Was he referring to a particular chassis or era? The 3.0 liter 104 has all sorts of problems - including head gaskets, premature valve jobs (mine at 40k), weak, expensive and virtually irreplaceable igntion control modules - just to name a few. Not a great engines all thing considered. That same magazine has referred to it as a cob job rushed to market and then fixed with the 3.2.

Surprised they limited it to just that one version. all 103 and all 104 engines were prone to headgasket leaks. they should have added it to the maintenace list. spark plugs every 15K, fuel + air filter every 40k, headgasket every 60K

__________________


1980 500SE/AMG Euro
1981 500SEL Euro
1982 380SEL
1983 300TD
1983 500SEC/AMG Euro
1984 500SEC
1984 300TD Euro
1986 190E 2.3-16
1986 190E 2.3
1987 300D
1997 C36 AMG
2003 C320T 4matic

past: 1969 280SE 4.5 | 1978 240D | 1978 300D | 1981 300SD | 1981 300SD | 1982 300CD | 1983 300CD | 1983 300SD | 1983 380SEC | 1984 300D | 1984 300D | 1984 300TD | 1984 500SEL | 1984 300SD | 1985 300D | 1986 300E | 1986 560SEL | 1986 560SEL/Carat | 1987 560SEC | 1991 300D 2.5 | 2006 R350

The phrase you quoted is out of context, and it refers to 300CE/E320 chassis. FWIW, this author also says:

"Early W124 sedans had some issues like duplex timing chains in the engines, but by the time the CE came along in 1988, the mechanicals were bullet-proof....Built in the era just before on-board electronics became all pervasive, they are relatively simple and inexpensive to maintain, promising faithful and reliable service if properly looked after."

I'm just learning about these cars, but one thing I wonder about is, just how "simple and inexpensive" they are to maintain. That's not my impression, anyway.

If simple to maintain is important I'd go for an 88-89 103 motor. You don't lose much in driveabilty - I think the 3.0 liter 104 motor only gained 6 ft lbs of torque and of course weighed more.

Budget for $1500-2000 a year in maintenance costs on any W124.

__________________
Kent Christensen
Albuquerque
'07 GL320CDI, '10 CL550. '01 Porsche Boxster
Two BMW motorcycles