PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum - View Single Post - 140 chassis diesels, what years were they available.

JimSmith · #4 11-13-2001, 02:23 PM

I was looking at gas W140 models too, but after reading all the threads about how complex these cars are, and how expensive they are to maintain, I elected to stay with the 1998 E300 TurboDiesel.
I would never take another chance with the 3.5 liter turbocharged in-line 6 that I got with the 1991 350SD, so I was looking at the S320 because that engine gets generally favorable reviews here. The mechanical and electrical complexity of that car are beyond the typical do-it-yourselfer in terms of tooling and experience needed. Based on input from this site, I have written off the W140 series of cars.

I am very impressed with the E300 TurboDiesel. It gets 33 miles per gallon running at 70 mph on the highway and some city travel. And it is very responsive, so responsive in fact that I bet it would get better mileage if I wasn't giving into the temptation of exploring its responsiveness all the time.

Used to be Mercedes-Benz machines were uniquely mechanically superior. In the last twenty years the edge has been eroded in the mechanical lead by imitation and well funded initiatives by the competition to achieve better mechanical performance. Mercedes-Benz has been focussed on competing in the styling and gadgetry worlds, and kind of conceding the mechanical leadership as it seems the cost to earnings ratio to maintain the role has become difficult to justify.

I recently wrote to "The Star" as I am an MBCA member, and critiqued the article on the decision not to bring the CDI family of "C", "E" and "S" Class Diesels to the US. Here was an opportunity to lead an initiative that takes new technology and vastly improves fuel efficiency and environmental emissions performance. The obstacle was the trucking industry and the cost impact of removing sulfur from our Diesel fuel. These new Diesels get much better mpg figures than their gasoline powered counterparts, should have the legendary reliability and longevity of the M-B Diesel (minus the 350SD excursion into poor mechanical design practices) and with the cleaner fuel, should improve the environmental performance of the huge fleet of commercial, industrial, utility and marine Diesels as well as the automobile fleet. Instead they took their experience at bat on this subject from Europe, where cleaner Diesel won approval across all of Europe, and elected not to step up to the plate. They quit. Daimler-Chrysler missed an opportunity of a lifetime if you ask me. But I guess you didn't so I'll get off my soapbox. Have a great day, Jim

P.S: I got a letter back from "The Star" that indicates they missed the point I tried to make, but asked me where all those Diesel fans were in 1999 when the E300D TurboDiesel was available? While I am certain they sold more E300D TurboDiesels in 1998 and 1999 (probably several thousand each year) than C43's and E55's combined, I would concede they make less profit on the lower priced models. Which is the basis for the decision to eliminate Diesels in the future.