I am looking for a diesel Mercedes. Something I can drive often. I am interested in fuel economy and ease/price of maintenance. I am a bit torn between a W123 and a W201.

Advantages of each are:
W123 (I'd get a 1981-1983 240D):
Wagon model available
Simpler mechanically, can have manual windows


W201:
Later models available (through at least 1987)
More modern appearance
Significantly better mileage

I'm sort of ambivalent between manual and automatic, I'd prefer the better mileage of a manual but spend most of my time in the city and all the shifting gets old after a while. Obviously if one transmission type is problematic in one of these vehicles I'd like to avoid it.

Can anyone give me (or link to) other advantages/disadvantages between these models? Specific things to look for? Which would you pick? I'm 6' tall, will I have headroom in the 190D?

You will get lots of opinions, but I think the best thing to do is drive a few examples of each and see what you prefer. They have a significantly different feel. The W123 is significantly heavier (and slower).

BTW, you may have difficulty finding a 240D wagon (or manual windows) in the U.S.

Parts for a 190D will be more expensive and harder to come by.
Manual transmission is great. You get used to it and it becomes a reflex, even in the worst bumper to bumper traffic. It makes you a better driver and gives you better coordination.

__________________
85 300D turbo pristine w 157k when purchased 161K now
83 300 D turbo 297K runs great. SOLD!
83 240D 4 spd manual- parted out then junked

you may have difficulty finding a 240D wagon

Yes. I know they exist, I've seen them. But finding one for sale is a challenge. Wagon-specific 240D parts might be hard to come by, then.

Manual transmission is great.

I know, I have a manual Isuzu Rodeo right now. (I've gotten to like the wagon body style now, and slow doesn't bother me). But there is still some work involved, and city driving wears out the clutch parts.

Which brings up another question: are clutches on the W123 and W201 cable or hydraulic?

IIRC, hydraulic. Also a 240 automatic is a super slow slug. You almost need to Fred Flintstone it to get moving.

__________________
RRGrassi


70's Southern Pacific #5608 Fairmont A-4 MOW car

13 VW JSW 2.0 TDI 193K, Tuned with DPF and EGR Delete.

91 W124 300D Turbo replaced, Pressure W/G actuator installed. 210K

90 Dodge D250 5.9 Cummins/5 speed. 400K

They're slow, but not that terrible. Due to the lower gears they may actually be a little quicker than the 300D up to 10-20 mph. They are a PITA on the highway (you don't really want to cruise much over 70), but a good "around town" car. The manual tranny feels quicker, and is probably a tad quicker in reality, but neither one is going to win a drag race. Drive a good one for yourself and see what you think.

I have a 79 240D with a 4 speed manual and it's a great car. I hear horror stories all the time about how slow they are, but I feel it has plenty of power, other than climbing big hills. It will do at least 90 mph, get about 30 mpg, i'm burning B100 in it and it is a fun car to drive. I also have a 240D with a 300D turbo engine and a 4 speed manual, with which to compare, and on the flats the 240D is is a little slower starting off, but is just fine. A big part of it is what you're used to driving.

I agree with Craig, go out and drive a few.

__________________
Resurrected Nov 2010 - 79 240(SD) with 83 617 engine and 4 speed manual, 2.88 rear and 2.5" straight pipe unknown mileage (Salmon)
83 240D parting out
96 Dodge Cummins 5 sp 4X4 long bed - 310k

http://flickr.com/photos/11103112@N03/

My vote is for the W201's if you don't need a lot of interior space. They just have a much more modern driving feel. I've had several - check my sig line. Great handling, easy on fuel (especially with a 5-speed, and there are pretty many 5-speed W201's out there).

The biggest downside to the W201 body style is lack of rear seat legroom.

My 2 cents,

SteveM.

__________________
'93 190E/D 2.5 Turbodiesel 5-speed (daily driver)
'87 190D 2.5 Turbo rustbucket - parts car
'84 Dodge Rampage diesel - Land Speed Record Holder
'13 Ram 2500 Diesel
'05 Toyota 4Runner

They are both really good designs. The 240 is much more durable and mechanic friendly, but the driving experience of the 190 is much more modern and nimble. I would stay away from an automatic. These cars are pretty old and an auto is a major expense to replace. The clutches are pretty easy and if you are good you wont have to do it but once very quarter of a million miles or less often. The manual trannies are about indestructable.

I would look for both and buy the best car I could find regardless or whether it is a 240 or 190.

There are no 240td specific parts except the trunk badge and the head, mechanically speaking.

Tom W

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.