Slower or faster isn't the whole story. I have both an 85 300D turbo and a 240D. Call me crazy but I swear I enjoy driving the 240D more....I just take the scenic route to work everyday.

__________________
85 300D 107K present
82 240D 190K present- next-to-slowest car I ever owned
81 240D 1995-2000- slowest car I ever owned
79 350 SE Euro 1996-2001- fastest car I ever owned

240 a stick?

__________________
http://superturbodiesel.com/images/sig.04.10.jpg
1995 E420 Schwarz
1995 E300 Weiss
#1987 300D Sturmmachine
#1991 300D Nearly Perfect
#1994 E320 Cabriolet
#1995 E320 Touring
#1985 300D Sedan
OBK #42

I have been driving my non-turbo 300D more and prefer it to the 300SD Turbo.
When I have to carry passengers I usually take the 300SD, but the non-turbo
300D seems to do just fine.

__________________
80 300D 340K Owned 30 yrs
83 300SD 440K Owned 9 yrs - Daily Driver 150mi/day
02 Z71 Suburban 117,000
15 Toyota Prius 2600 miles
00 Harley Sportster 24k
09 Yamaha R6
03 Ninja 250

Another positive on the non-turbo is that there is one less part to break. Turbos aren't the most expensive item on the car, but they aren't the cheapest either. One less thing to have to worry about.

__________________
2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee 3.0 CRD (OM642)

Nope...I wish. It's auto.

__________________
85 300D 107K present
82 240D 190K present- next-to-slowest car I ever owned
81 240D 1995-2000- slowest car I ever owned
79 350 SE Euro 1996-2001- fastest car I ever owned

I agree, they feel completely different. I love to cruise on the highway in the 300D, but the 240D feels "lighter" around town in stop and go traffic. I have to think that folks who find 240D and N/A 300D too slow in town have other problems with the car. My 240D auto will drive with the traffic pretty well, at 6000 feet above sea level.

Interesting. OUr 300d NA is a dog, particularly in the mtns, compared to the 300d turbo. Altitude makes a big difference with an NA, whereas with a turbo, your engine is basically still thinking it's at sea level.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

That's what I find as well, but my N/A experience was limited to a poorly maintained 300D I'm sure was below the service limit on compression. I find my turbo 617 keeps up with traffic very well, and cruises the mountains faster than my Toyota truck.

However, I drove TomJ's 240D with a four speed and found it quite peppy.

__________________
'83 240D with 617.952 and 2.88
'01 VW Beetle TDI
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD
'89 Toyota 4x4, needs 2L-T
'78 280Z with L28ET - 12.86@110
Oil Burner Kartel #35

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b1...oD/bioclip.jpg

Ha, when I was a kid we had to practically get out and push our 79 240D up the mountains in West Virginia. We had a 76 240D that felt a bit more powerful.

__________________
1985 Mercedes Benz 300SD, TMU
2015 Chrysler 200S

I have thought about that too. I wounder if the non-turbo cars have a better record with oil leaks?
Now that I have reread it, I would be sure that they have less of a problem with oil leaks...........no boost!

Very true, the turbo has more power, especially at higher altitudes. However, the 240D is perfectly capable of driving with traffic under most conditions. The exception is pulling up significant hills at higher speeds, the 240D just runs out of horsepower. The other limitation of the 240D on the highway is the gear ratio. I don't like to keep it much over 70 mph for extended periods of time, it just seems like it's working the engine too hard. I've never driven a N/A 300D, but I assume it has more useable power than the 240D.

would it have held up to a turbo with 4 speed?

I had a 80 300TD, and never did I have a problem in traffic. I was equal to the 82 wagon I still have until about 30 MPH. As others have said, on a two lane highway passing at higher speeds requires more passing time than a turbo'd version. I think you'll find most people with a turbo will claim the non turbo is very slow and tell you not to buy it. Having owned both in nearly identical forms at the same time I did not prefer one over the other. My non turbo did not leak a single drop until I put the GCF oil filter on, and was a joy to drive. If the cars in good shape/good price do not let the non torbo status stop you from buying it.

Sorry, new to MB. GCF?

Gulf Coast Filters. They make bypass oil filters that allow for greatly extended oil change intervals.