I second Larry's experience and opinion. I think the generally negative comments come from people with little actual Mercedes manual transmission driving time. The coordination of the chassis, engine and transmission (weight of the car, handling, torque curve, shift points, clutch action and shift patterns/throws) by Mercedes is flawless, once you get the feel of the car.

The clutches are hydraulically operated, which makes the clutch something that takes some getting used to initially if you come from a cable operated set up, but it allows the clutch to be extremely robust. My 190E 2.3-16 still has its original clutch, and I average more than 180,000 miles per clutch on my Diesels. I have actually never had one wear out and slip yet, they usually fall to oil leaking past the rear seal. The clutch operation is near effortless, making stop and go traffic easy on the left leg, yet you get used to its action and can shift smoothly and quickly. And it never needs adjusting.

As I noted Mercedes does a very good job of matching the character of the car and the transmission. My 190E, while having a similarly shaped shift knob to the Diesel, has a different pattern and throw as well as shift points and overall tempo than that car. The balance of all these features are accommodated without sacrificing durability. I have never had a transmission component fail.

So, I am sure there are a lot of people with a favorite transmission, like an Acura or a BMW, that they feel are "better" than the Mercedes-Benz units. They can cite a number of reasons for their preferences, which, in some cases are probably justified. But there is no reason to suggest the Mercedes units are deficient and do not contribute to the driver's control of the vehicle, which in my view is the main benefit of a manual transmission.

While I would like to drive a 300D Turbo of the W123 variety with a manual transmission, mainly because I would like to see if I can do a better job shifting than the beastly automatic it comes with, I suspect Mercedes had some rationale for not making that combination available. It is more peculiar that the 300D Turbo Sedan was never sold in Germany (only the wagon was available, and that also only came with an automatic transmission). It is possible that the car and engine were intended mainly for the US market, and the cost to develop a suitable transmission for that market was deemed a poor use of corporate funds. Or it could be that it was more of a challenge to make the machine civilized as someone suggested in an earlier post. Unless someone tries it we will never know. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)