Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Vintage Mercedes Forum

View Poll Results: Which do you prefer?
6.3 14 73.68%
6.9 5 26.32%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-08-2004, 06:21 PM
Tim's__Benz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
6.9 vs 6.3

Which do you prefer, and for what reasons?


Last edited by Tim's__Benz; 02-08-2004 at 08:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-08-2004, 06:24 PM
Tim's__Benz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I voted 6.3 because I think they look very deceiving. They do not look near as fast as they are. The 6.9 looks a little newer and possibly fast. I also like the looks of the 6.3 a little better. I am a 116 fan, but the 108 is a little better in my opinion.
Tim
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-08-2004, 06:32 PM
WANT '71 280SEL's Avatar
I'll Go Upside Your Head!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,378
Since you voted 6.3, I guess it's only natural for me to vote 6.9
-David
__________________
_____________________________________________

2000 Honda Accord V6 137k miles

1972 300SEL 4.5 98k miles

_____________________________________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-08-2004, 06:53 PM
Tim's__Benz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Well I figured as much.
Tim
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-08-2004, 07:14 PM
Tim's__Benz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Looks like the popular vote goes with me, David.
Tim
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-08-2004, 07:32 PM
fahrgewehr2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 1,264
How can you guys vote without having driven the cars?

Are we voting on styling?
__________________
'90 300SE 298k
-300K and it gets put into retirement.
'80 300D 255k Purchased new by family in 1980.

Had a:
1973 220 (gas)
1980 300SD
1992 400E
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-08-2004, 07:51 PM
Tim's__Benz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
No, but that is all that some of us can go by. We are still young. We will drive them soon. I would really like some opinions from those who HAVE driven them, but, if you haven't, just say which one you WOULD prefer.
Tim
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-08-2004, 10:43 PM
WANT '71 280SEL's Avatar
I'll Go Upside Your Head!
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,378
I say 6.9 because it seems a little more practical. Haven't heard as many horror stories withe the suspension and the 6.9 has a higher top end speed of like 145mph? Anyways, I LOVE them both. One day I'll have both sitting next to each other in my garage and i'll have to choose which one I'll drive that day. They'll both be black w/ black wheel covers. I think the wheel covers on w116's give it a prestigious look.
Have a Nice Day
David
__________________
_____________________________________________

2000 Honda Accord V6 137k miles

1972 300SEL 4.5 98k miles

_____________________________________________
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-08-2004, 10:49 PM
Tomguy's Avatar
Vintage Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: near Scranton, PA
Posts: 5,407
6.3 has more power/torque I believe, and I LOVE the 108's style and suspension. (Yes I know a 6.3 is a 109 w/air suspension, but it can't be too much different... right?)
__________________
Current:
2021 Charger Scat Pack Widebody "Sinabee"
2018 Durango R/T

Previous:
1972 280SE 4.5
2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited "Hefe", 1992 Jeep Cherokee Laredo "Jeepy", 2006 Charger R/T "Hemi"
1999 Chrysler 300M - RIP @ 221k
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-08-2004, 10:58 PM
fahrgewehr2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 1,264
Quote:
6.3 has more power/torque I believe
Are you sure? I have seen different ratings for the 6.3. You may have to convert DIN to SAE or whatever. Has MB always measued power at the wheels?

I'm not a 'horsepower' type guy, so I won't try and figure it out, but maybe one of you guys will.
__________________
'90 300SE 298k
-300K and it gets put into retirement.
'80 300D 255k Purchased new by family in 1980.

Had a:
1973 220 (gas)
1980 300SD
1992 400E
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-08-2004, 11:35 PM
Tim's__Benz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by WANT '71 280SEL
I say 6.9 because it seems a little more practical. Haven't heard as many horror stories withe the suspension and the 6.9 has a higher top end speed of like 145mph? Anyways, I LOVE them both. One day I'll have both sitting next to each other in my garage and i'll have to choose which one I'll drive that day. They'll both be black w/ black wheel covers. I think the wheel covers on w116's give it a prestigious look.
Have a Nice Day
David

Diddo
Tim

Last edited by Tim's__Benz; 02-08-2004 at 11:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-08-2004, 11:41 PM
Tim's__Benz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
David was telling me that he had heard on the forum that the 6.9s ate up the transmissions that Mercedes put on them. I believe he said that Aaron had said this. Is this true? The 6.3s have a 3 speed and the 6.9s have a four speed, correct?
Thanks
Tim
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-09-2004, 12:17 AM
fahrgewehr2's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 1,264
Other way around.
__________________
'90 300SE 298k
-300K and it gets put into retirement.
'80 300D 255k Purchased new by family in 1980.

Had a:
1973 220 (gas)
1980 300SD
1992 400E
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-09-2004, 04:07 AM
gerryvz's Avatar
"Unhinged Troll" - Jim B.
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 1,268
The 6.3 handles better, is quicker, more stylish, and overall is a far funner car to drive.

The 6.9 is more practical, has a slightly (perhaps 5 MPH) higher top speed, is more modern in several ways, and is easier to live with as a daily driver.

Neither car is hard on transmissions. 6.3s can be a bit hard on rear ends if abused, but this takes many many burnouts. Both are quite reliable and have a bad rap as to cost and reliability. The reason that they tend to be expensive to maintain, is that much of the required maintenance was never performed, and over the years this has piled up to the point where it is required. Once these cars are repaired, the repairs are good for another 10-20 years. The suspension on both cars is a good example of this.

The air suspension of the 6.3 is both cheaper to repair and superior to the hydropneumatic suspension of the 6.9.

I speak from authority -- I had low-mileage examples of both cars in my garage for around 4 years, and continue to drive the 6.3. I replaced the 6.9 with a 1994 E500.

Cheers,
Gerry
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-09-2004, 09:39 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 439
I have heard it said that the 6.9 is the 747 of Mercedes sadans (perhaps up to that time), and having driven both cars would more or less agree to that general lableing. The 6.3 however is the Old Man with lots of class & muscles , sort of like me, 60 and can still kick some hard ass. Except with the 6.3 it ant no fantacy.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page