Guys how do you check a vin number?
carfax only can do it if it is 1981 or later?

You can't check a VIN number on a vintage car.

If the car is otherwise salvageable, and a decent car, repainting it will destroy part of its value vs. maintaining it as an older car.

I would never take an owner's word for anything on a 6.3, particularly when it comes to rust. you need to have a competent shop spend a few hours checking out the car mechanically and cosmetically, giving you an estimate of what MUST be done, vs. what SHOULD be done. This process should include going over the car's underside and around the wheel wells and jacking points with a screwdriver, poking every inch or two to find hidden rust.

Is the car in Toronto or is it here on the US west coast now? If it's in Toronto, then it's probably safe to assume it's been driven there, and thus I'd rule out any proclamations that it doesn't have rust. Owners saying that a 6.3 doesn't have rust is like someone saying "the check is in the mail."

Can you post more info about the car? Who is the seller? How long have they had it? What have they done to it? Who has maintained it? What recent parts have been replaced? What has the owner told you NEEDS to be done to the car? How much are they asking for the car?

We need more information.

Cheers,
Gerry

The owner bought it in 1992. Brought it to Toronto in 1995.
He said at that point the air bags were changed.
He has more than one vehicle and said he has not driven the car in the snow.
He is looking for 20,000 for it.
I still havent seen the car. I will see it on Sunday.

I am also curious about a 300sel I found. It is a 1968 but the current owner has no info on the car. Doesnt know how many owners it had. Not sure if it is even the right engine. To me the block looks like it is aluminum so it cant be the M130 then.

If the car was driven in Canada, it's probable there is rust somewhere. This needs to be checked out.

$20K is pretty top dollar for a 6.3. Either it has low miles, has had significant restoration work, or it is an exquisitely maintained original car. Few of them warrant this kind of price.

If you are interested to see what $18,000 can buy you for a 6.3, you can see mine at http://homepage.mac.com/gerryvz/PhotoAlbum3.html So you should expect a $20K car to be as good or better than this. Mine has a known history and has lived its entire life in Portland and southern California -- the original salesman who sold it new, still works at the dealership here in Portland, Oregon.

It is a pristine, 56,000 mile original car. You can see the leather and the wood -- it is all original and has never been restored in any way. I just put $5K into it to have all rubber underneath and under the hood of the car replaced less than one year ago, plus have the no-longer-available factory oilpan skidplate installed. In 1998 the complete air suspension was refurbished with all new parts. The car has not dropped one millimeter since, even after not being driven for periods of up to 2 months.

For the car you are looking at, you should expect mechanicals and cosmetics at or exceeding this same standard. I just don't want to see you make an expensive mistake, as so many people have done with 6.3s. I have heard first-hand stories from buyers of even "reputable" people in the M-100 community, who have misrepresented cars (obviously knowing better) and buyers being duped.

Another fellow I know, purchased a 6.3 in the Bay Area not too long ago from a friend of mine -- a car that I had driven and that I thought I knew. But a car that had lived part of its life in the Eastern US, and which had some significant hidden rust. I felt REALLY horrible because I had helped connect both of the parties. But in the end, it's buyer beware. Doing homework, particularly when spending this much money on a 6.3, is super important.

As far as the 6-cylinder car: if it is an early (M189 3.0L engine) car, run and hide, and don't consider it even for one moment. The distributor caps on these cars are now over $800. Their engines are a derivative of the Gullwing engine, and repairing them makes a 6.3 look positively CHEAP! Many parts for these engines are no longer available, vs. just about everything being available on a 6.3. Plus these cars' engines are not reliable. It's nearly impossible to kill a 6.3 engine (but easy to kill a 6.3 transmission or rear end!). If it is an M130 2.8 liter engine, the engine will be quite reliable but rather underpowered for the car. These have around 180 HP (gross) and have to be revved up pretty good to get the power out of them. Off the line and in city traffic they are pretty sluggish beasts, but on the freeway they are just fine (though they sing a loud song at speed). Reliable and (fairly) cheap though.

Your best bet in my book is a 300SEL or 280SEL 4.5. Cheap, reliable, easy to get parts for, plentiful, and very powerful cars. You can't go wrong with a good 4.5. The 6.3 has a bit of an "edge" to it that just isn't for everyone. A good 4.5 provides 80% of the thrill for 30% of the hassle of a 6.3.

Cheers,
Gerry

Jerry, I like the last paragraph.

__________________
Regards

Warren

Currently 1965 220Sb, 2002 FORD Crown Vic Police Interceptor

Had 1965 220SEb, 1967 230S, 280SE 4.5, 300SE (W126), 420SEL

ENTER > = (HP RPN)

Not part of the in-crowd since 1952.

So RR3, what's the verdict on the car? I'm hoping that for US $20K it is a local club concours winner, which typically a 6.3 at this price should be.

Cheers,
Gerry

Gerry, as you said for $20k it better be REAL nice!!!!

Fred

__________________
MB-less

I just took my 6.3 out yesterday (Sunday) for a 100-mile drive. It reminded me how fun the car is, up to a point. The 560SEC and the 500E are MUCH more practical, modern, and easy cars to live with. The 6.3 is at best an expensive toy.

I was a die-hard M-100 fan. I have seen the light I am grateful to several people for helping me see the light: Albert Champion, Robert Fenton, Sig Raethke, and the collective leadership of the International M-100 Group. Each party helped convince me either through positive reinforcement (or in the case of the M-100 Group leadership through grossly negative reinforcement), the futility of M-100 ownership in general. I'm close to being cured of this affliction.

As payment to those who have helped me, I hope to save other people from getting this M-100 sickness.

Cheers,
Gerry

Gerry,

Have followed and read almost all of you 6.3 6.9 postings, as I recently purchased a 6.9 in Cincinnnati. Was curious as to whether you would qulaify the M-100 sickness as trying to use a 25-35 year old car as a daily driver, or whether the sickness would be defined as owning an M-100 car at all?

I have noticed more than a few M-100 fans attempt to make the cars more modern than they are realistically capable of, in terms of speed, handling and safety. I must confess that I drive old cars occasionally, having attempted to use them as a daily driver and being sorely dissappointed, in terms of reliability or sanity.

I view the M-100's as being state of the art(arguable, I know) in their era, nothing more. The average $20,000 contemporay car outperforms them in many ways, and always will. What these cars possess, like all old cars, is a sense of the past that cannot be recaptured. That should be what people purchasing them should be seeking, lest they be dissappointed in their inability to perform to contemporary standards.

Finally, having spent the last year reading, researching etc, I can see that there is some sort of disfunctionality with these M-100 groups. The way I see it, the cars are bigger than the people involved, and it is unfortunate, although understandable, that you now have a negative association with the cars because of these twits. Or should I say alleged twits? Who cares. I just want to thank you for posting really informative stuff, which I have always learned something from. Collecting/maintaining old cars is so mentally taxing that you should definitely enjoy it, so I think getting rid of the M100 bug was a wise choice for you, given your experience. Please keep posting!

gerry,

thnx for the kind words.

i still have the very cherry, virtually perfect 6.9, but as you have learned, the 560sec is much more fun. better balanced. better brakes. in fact, the only thing that i think the US-MARKET 560sec's lack is the horsepower and torque that their euro-siblings possessed. the car needs the euro output.

my guess is that to get that one would have to replace the us engine with a euro engine. i get tempted, and then refrain from doing that. i like to keep my cars pretty stock as a matter of preserving them in original condition.

i acquired a very low mileage 1997 c140 last year. it is not as intimate as the c126, but it has the oomph and the cd slipperiness that makes it more thrilling to drive at speed than the 560. its major drawback is a lousy center console and its blindspots. it is the c126 on steroids.

i also run my 1995 e320cab in preference to the 6.9. a beautiful and highly tossable bit of benz fluff. in my view, so much better than the current rash of benz cabriolets.

i care to note, here, that the best thing about these cars, c126, c140, c124 is that they have brakes that match the go. in my experience, neither the 6.3 nor the 6.9 had enough brakes for the speeds that the cars could achieve. experiencing this braking inadequacy can be frightening.

as to the 500e. i'm jealous. i'm still looking for a cherry one with low mileage. that isn't black on black. found a one-owner socal silver/black that i thought was going to be mine, then the owner recovered and forced his wife to renege on the deal. every time i visit my sister i am forced to drive by it sitting un-used in the driveway. drives me crazy. unrequited 500e lust. a dangerous state.

so it goes.

tight lines.

AJW,

Owning an M-100 is different things to different people. I drove my 6.9 as a daily driver for nearly 4 years. It didn't let me down, and was very reliable. But at 12-13 MPG, not the most economical car in the world. My friend Dan Smith, here in Portland, owns 5 6.3s (all in good to concours condition), plus a 6.3 coupe, and drives most of the 6.3s daily (or as near daily as you can a 6.3).

That being said, owning an M-100 is a significant commitment no matter how it is used. By significant I mean both EMOTIONALLY and FINANCIALLY. I think you can use any 25-35 year old car as a daily driver, but a 6.3 isn't just "any" 35 year old car. It's a loud, rumbly, crude beast of a car.

You are correct that the M-100s (all of them) were the pinnacle of performance and luxury for their respective eras. But that's not to say they were the pinnacle of practicality. If you look at the owners of M-100 cars, they tended to be on the "wealthier" end, and the cars were generally used as toys until sold down the line to other owners.

The sense of the past that you mention is indeed what keeps people engaged with the cars. But as I was cruising along Washington Highway 14 in the Columbia River Gorge yesterday, on a clear, cold, 37-degree Sunday, with my 5 year old son next to me in the front (booster) seat, driving 70-80 MPH, I was reminded of how difficult it is to coax a good flow of heat out of the 6.3's antiquated HVAC system. I was reminded how wallowy the (once state of the art) steering is. Sure, it's a product of a bygone age. But the romance only goes so far.

Many people have commented publicly and privately in various Internet forums on the malaise that has punctuated and continues to negatively mark the M-100 world. This dysfunction is the result of several factors, primarily caused by the arrogance, self-importance, pettiness, dishonesty and utter stubbornness of a few individuals who happen to control the M-100 Group. Unfortunately (as your thoughts indicate) these attitudes have driven dozens, if not hundreds, of owners away and kept the same number of would-be owners from joining the community and club -- essentially stifling the whole small group and vastly reducing the potential of what it could be.

This dysfunction was not solely, but was the largest sole cause of my disillusionment and eventual total rejection of things M-100. Others who read this forum (even participated on this thread!) have been first-hand victims of this bunch of folks, and others on this forum (and thread) have observed and publicly commented on the sad state of M-100 affairs. I am extremely happy to report that in my experiences with MB ownership, luckily this dysfunction has ONLY existed in the M-100 world. Certainly it doesn't exist in the 560SEC (www.mbcoupes.com) and 500E communities.

Car clubs aside, the point of all my posts on this thread is to give others the benefit of what I have learned, which I'm entirely willing to share. Owning M-100 cars and having a good experience at doing it is as you say a big and mentally taxing job. Sadly most people don't have the patience nor pocketbook to truly enjoy M-100 ownership as it should be.

Thanks for the kind words. I've never corresponded with you before to my knowledge so I'm surprised at the astuteness of your observations !!

Cheers,
Gerry

gerry, I'm coming in at the tail-end here, but can attest to AJW's astuteness Just watch for his dripping sarcasm in future posts, right AJW?

I still have a speeding ticket for 265kmh somewhere in my files, courtesy of an attempt to outrun a helicopter to the beach in a 560SEL, output was listed as 300bhp. What was the US smog engine's power output?

__________________
Nachi11744

238hp, I believe.

That's tragic, 240bhp was the 5.0l output for ROW(rest of the world)

__________________
Nachi11744