Which was Mercedes' finest era?

[ADP]

Originally Posted by Todd Miller

And with regard to the comment made about carburetors splashing fuel down cylinder walls. This doesn't happen. Carburetors atomize fuel and it enters the intake runners as a "fog."

Google Giovanni Venturi : )

Nothing wrong with a carburetor except when general motors got involved and attempted computer control!

Ann

[Todd Miller]

Although their throttle body injection is pretty nice.

[mercmad6.3]

Originally Posted by ADP

Google Giovanni Venturi : )

Nothing wrong with a carburetor except when general motors got involved and attempted computer control!

Ann

Nothing right either. Carburetors belong to the last century,the beginning of the last Century in fact.. Put simply ,any one can build and tune an electronic fuel injection which will improve an engine and cut emmisons..when did you last meet some one who made their own carburator.

[mercmad6.3]

Any time before the mill stone of Chrysler was tied to the neck of Daimler -Benz.
Consider the present scene of devastation. Chrysler, quite recently the most profitable US carmaker by far, is bleeding millions so fast that its purchaser, Daimler-Benz, was buckling at the knees. Daimler not only overpaid ridiculously, but compounded this sin by heavy-handed and typically unsuccessful long-distance interference.
The conceit is compounded by a second major fault, autocracy. The Western industry was originally created by all-powerful entrepreneurs. Their heirs can't match their genius, but grasp for their power. A bitter boardroom battle at Daimler thus ousted the company's top car man and left total control to Former chairman Jurgen Schrempp, the mastermind (if that's the word) of the Chrysler fiasco. It's unfair to blame Schrempp for other flops, like the original instability of the A-cars or sluggish sales of the unsmart Smart car. But he's certainly responsible for the halved share price and the sadly reduced reputation.

The misfiring of Mercedes is a textbook study in top-down management. Because of the autocratic traditions, Western car firms have lagged behind the general management trend towards self-managed teams whose leaders have genuine autonomy. When the new approach has prevailed - as when Ford launched the Taurus in the US - the results have been spectacular. But the industry reverts to past form at the drop of a hat. Even Ford forgot the Taurus lessons, rediscovering them in the 1990s with, of course, renewed success.

The success of the W111 through to the W124 was a direct result of autonomous teams developing products independently of top management who were left to the running of the company.
Names like Waxenburger,Uhlenhuat ,Geiger ,Bella Berenji et al can be linked to the teams that not only produced supeior products but have gone down in history as true innovators and leaders in automotive technology.
name one such person at Daimler AG today.....

[Emmerich]

My 6.3 was built when labor was cheap and technology was expensive. Its a tank, so is my 6.9.

I think the last great car MB built was the 1991 126.

[whitevan73]

I have Very limited knolwlege of all the merc ranges but own a 1967 W108 250SE and a 1963 W111 220SEB salon. Yesterday i drove the 108 to the storage depot where i keep my just about running Finny. I bought the finny first, just love the body shape. I put these cars side by side and was quite supprised at the difference between these cars. The 108 is a nice solid, easy to drive machine but the finny is defininatley a more difficult drive. Saying that, the finney seems to be more solid and is more fun to drive. The fitments on the finny are definatley better quality than the 108.

W111 for me, solid,simple and looks great.

Paul

[ADP]

Originally Posted by mercmad6.3

Nothing right either. Carburetors belong to the last century,the beginning of the last Century in fact.. Put simply ,any one can build and tune an electronic fuel injection which will improve an engine and cut emmisons..when did you last meet some one who made their own carburator.

I won't disagree - but American car manufacturers weren't up to the task on a production level in passenger gasoline engines for a long time. Thats not to say they didn't try! Both AMC and Ford tried to get systems to market, but most of those attempts ended up being retrofitted with carbs.

The key here to fuel injection is ELECTRONIC.

Mechanical fuel injection went by the wayside because it was awful on fuel economy and emissions.

Early electronic injection was plagued with problems. The electronics were just not up to snuff. Compared to carburetors, fuel injection was pretty spendy stuff.

What really drove the evolution of fuel injection in the US was the involvement of the EPA in automobile emissions. First, they tried to engineer electronically controlled carburetors (I still have all those darn GM carb tools!) which were a total disaster, but eventually the Americans got on board.

So to get back on track, this is another reason I like the early 1970s as my MB era of choice. Technologically, there are some pretty good things going for my car and its a pleasure to drive because of it.

Ann

[Mark DiSilvestro]

They may be primitive and tempermental, but I still think carbs are easier and cheaper for a DIYer to keep going than an old neglected fuel injection system.

Happy Motoring, Mark

[Ritchie]

Resurecting a interesting thread.

[lee polowczuk]

Well, I will answer it this way.

If I won the lottery, it would be a 108 convertible with a 3.5 or 4.5

it would be dark blue or forest green.... with a cognac interior

[strelnik]

Originally Posted by michaeld

In terms of quality, durability, reliability, and any other quality you might care to add, which was Mercedes' finest era? When did they make their best cars? If you pick a given model/year/period, what are your reasons?

This might be skewed toward older cars because it is located in the pre-79 portion of the forum. So what about newer Mercedes models? Are the 2000+ models the epitome of Mercedes quality? Why or why not?

I can't speak to the newest cars, since I don't own any-- by design.

Here are my picks through the years, based on driving or owning or both:

W136 170 gasser- survived WW2, Stalingrad, and was made for ten years after the war, absolute can-smasher, bulletproof transportation

OM636 170D - terrific utility car, engine used in industrial applications until 2003! That beats out everyone else, even Citroen! 1950-2003

1950-1960-1970s 6 cylinder. In pontons, fintails and stroke/8 cars
Power and luxury based on needs 220 to 280 series-- all good.

W116- class beyond class for the executive or the amateur enthusiast

W123 diesels- whether 4 or 5 cylinders, it had durability, power, luxury dependability

W107 series: from the 70s to the 80s, reviving the concept of the Mercedes roadster was never a bad idea, as long as the marketing and finance weenies kep their hands of the cars!

[wolf_walker]

M116 3.5-litre vee-8
AutoCar, 17 February 1972

Should cast iron seem an old fashioned material for the cylinder block of an advanced engine from one of the most respected companies in Europe, it should be borne in mind that the engine was designed at the period of maximum disillusionment with light alloy in the USA, where the Mercedes was intended to be sold. Mercedes also had their good reasons for the choice. Cast iron is economical to buy, predictable and has good wearing and sound damping properties. The weight penalty was 30kg (66lb) compared with aluminium. But it was reckoned that at least that weight of sound damping material would have been needed to subdue the increased noise transmission from a light alloy block. Also West German noise regulations call for a noise measurement from the side of the car. It is uneconomical to sound damp the sides of the engine bay just for this purpose.

On a personal note, I've enjoyed my 73 W114 all in all, having come from a background of W123/W126/W124/W201's. It looks a lot older than it drives, I think as for running gear it's an excellent spot between newer 80's era cars but with older styling. I don't think it's any better built than a W123 and they certainly did learn a bit along the way.
I'm not big on luxury cars other than huge old domestic stuff for sentimental reasons, so the more utilitarian Mercedes appeal to me. The M110 was a silly engine to put in an auto trans sedan sold in the US in my opinion, and a carb was pretty sad for the money and the brand(forward in reverse?) but the chassis is good save for the rust-ability.
An 80's car is still a better driver for a dozen reasons, for what that's worth.

[daidnik]

It was an era focussed on making Mercedes affordable to the masses. This design approach utilized an economy of design in commonality of the design features and parts spanning different strata of models. The same fundamental suspension design would span from the basic W114/115 sedans to the SL's. This enabled the building of the same quality into the cars regardless of the particular strata of the vehicle. Granted, there were certainly different comfort and performance differences between a 115 sedan and a R107 SL, but you had the same level of quality in these cars to enable them to last a very long time.

Now, longevity and quality was certainly present in the earlier W111's & W108's, but there was a more mass-oriented balance of quality and performance in the /8 era. The trailing arm rear suspension design of the /8's was far superior to the earlier swing-axle design. Better comfort and far improved nimble and agile handling. The front axle design also had improved comfort and handling over the earlier king-pin design, was cheaper to manufacture, and is easier to work on.

I think of this era as the pinnacle of 'balance in design'. As we move further beyond the /8 era to the W123's and on, the various strata in the Mercedes line no longer have the same level of functional quality built into the cars. We see more and more troublesome plastic interior components sprinkled all over. Stuff that cracks, develops rattles and breaks. Another problem compounding this era is that of contradictory markets. There were quite a number of W114's sold in the US market, but not so many W115's. The 4-cyl cars were viewed as underpowered in the US, so the vast majority of the US cars were 6-cyls evn though the 4-cyl makes much better fit and weight balance for maneuverability. This aspect of the US market complicated the Mercedes for the masses idea somewhat. The 6-cyl is a bit of tight fit in a 114. By the time you've added A/C & P/S, you've got a bit of a problem with air flow and cooling in hot climates. That setup isn't so easy to work on either. In a way, the US market pushed aside the functionalism of an affordable Mercedes quality for cars with more amenities. Amenities that would make proper maintenance more expensive especially over the long term in years.

I've owned a W111 220Sb, a W108 250S and a W115 220, and I think the W115 represents the best balance in functional quality, utility and comfort. I can drive that car quite nimbly over the nastiest bumpy, ragged winding mountain roads and it is quite happy. I couldn't do that with my 108 despite both having all the suspension bushings, king-pins/ball joints, Bilsteins all re-done. The 108 had a bit more comfort on the open freeway at 80 mph, but not a lot. I take a late model R129 on these same ragged mountain roads, and I've got lots of power, but the car is just not that happy with that terrain. It needs decent roads, but feels great and quite assured at 100 on a good road. There is still an element of balance in this later high end design, but it's no longer a realm acessible to the masses, nor will this $100k level car be around at 30-40 years of age.

There have certainly been a number of advances since the 1970's, but these have been implemented in more complex cars. These cars come with extra baggage that will be their death knell. The 70's was the end on the simple car era. In those cars, you still had the same level of functional quality as in the 60's & 50's cars and had the technical advances in the suspension design which was different from the earlier cars.

I'll say one thing about all the Mercedes I've ever owned or driven. This is that in the balance of their design, you get a vehicle that handles predictably in ALL circumstances, no matter what, as much as possible within the design technology of the time. They will not put a 350+ bhp motor in a car that does not have a suspension that is up to the task of maneuvering the car. There have been numerous nonsensical violations of this principle in US made cars over the decades. That is truly a design embarrassment that I think the US mfrs are STILL trying to work out of. Man that's embarrassing.

[Ritchie]

Really enjoying this thread. New to this world, I am learning a lot about Vintage Mercedes. Mercedes_Benz, you have my full respect.

Originally Posted by daidnik

There have been numerous nonsensical violations of this principle in US made cars over the decades.

yep. My 65 Galaxie 500 with a monster 390 and manual drum brakes. I do like manual brakes though. Almost like replacing the "air-bag" with a metal spike to make us drive safer. i.e. the more safety devices we put in place, the more risk we take. one emergency stop in the Galaxie is all it takes to get it that this car needs lots of room to stop and that becomes habit.

"risk homeostasis" http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1097.htm

[blueeagle289]

I agree with the posters regarding excellent Mercedes models and car periods, but I think my 92 300CE Coupe, with the 104 engine and an EZL ignition controller certainly is one of the best in style and performance. It will go from 50 to 100+ mph in a flash and is one of the best built cars of the Mercedes group. The interior is superb and handling is great.

Ben Carter