I've driven several versions of 123's 124's and 201's... I agree, the 124 is much more like a 123 than the 201 is.
The 201 is cramped. It's much nimbler than the larger cars, and way easier to park anywhere... In turbo form it's a BLAST to drive. In stick form it's supremely economical and the 2.5 is even sporty with the manual. I've not driven a 2.2 yet... But the thought of breaking the 50mpg barrier has me tempted...

The 124 when in good tune has flabbergasting power, and still gets decent fuel economy... 26+ better than the 240 will do in auto trim. 240 manual likely tops it... The 124 has just as much room as the 123, but more power and much more comfortable to drive.

The 123 is just classy. It's got excellent handling, but it's noisy, tractor like in town, and howls on the highway... Not really safe in auto trim on freeways.

__________________
John HAUL AWAY, OR CRUSHED CARS!!! HELP ME keep the cars out of the crusher! A/C Thread
"as I ride with my a/c on... I have fond memories of sweaty oily saturdays and spewing R12 into the air. THANKS for all you do!

My drivers:
1987 190D 2.5Turbo
1987 190D 2.5Turbo
1987 190D 2.5-5SPEED!!!

1987 300TD
1987 300TD
1994GMC 2500 6.5Turbo truck... I had to put the ladder somewhere!

If I get the one im looking at, It will be a automatic which im ok with.

I have both a 240D auto and 190D 2.5 auto and would say that the 190D is better to drive, it can get out of its way better and is way more fuel efficient. I think it is pretty easy to work on, obviously the 240D has more space and generally easier to work on but somethings are easier on the 190D. The automatics in both cars are very smooth and responsive (240D does the best with the little power it has) besides the 240D needing another gear or something so it could drive somewhere else than the far right lane on the interstate. I do have a manual car which is getting the engine from the 240D auto.

Both are comfortable cruising cars and relaxing to drive. In the 201, I upgraded to the 89+ facelift seats which are better than the early 201 seats. It also seems that the facelift seats in the 123 are more comfortable than the early seats.

One huge advantage the 201 has over any 123 is reliable, cold AC. The first couple of years of 201s may have still used the H4 compressors (not sure about that, don't quote me on it) but the later ones used Denso compressors which are much better than the H4s. That being said, it is ACC instead of manual climate control and while the CCU in the 201 is more reliable than the automatic unit in the early 123 (I have no experience with the later 123s), it can fail, if you can get a 123 with manual climate control, or find a 201 with manual control (European only I believe), you will have probably have less issues.

__________________
Current: 1975 450SEL, 83 300D, 88 Yugo GVX, 90 300D OM603 swap, 91 F150 4.6 4v swap, 93 190E Sportline LE 3.0L M104 swap, 93 190E Sportline LE Megasquirt, 03 Sprinter, 06 E500 4Matic wagon.

I've had both, a '82 240 with a 4 speed manual and a '85 2.2 190 with an automatic. The 190 was a nice little car, but the interior felt hideously cheap and was too small for me. The 240 was a great car but was just too underpowered to cope with all the hills in Southwest PA. If I had to do it all over again I'd take another 240 with a manual.

I have noticed the first few years of the W201s felt cheaper than the later ones. The interior quality in my 87 was fine but both of my 93s were even better.

__________________
Current: 1975 450SEL, 83 300D, 88 Yugo GVX, 90 300D OM603 swap, 91 F150 4.6 4v swap, 93 190E Sportline LE 3.0L M104 swap, 93 190E Sportline LE Megasquirt, 03 Sprinter, 06 E500 4Matic wagon.

I have used both the W123 240D NA auto and the W201 190D 2.2 NA auto.

The 190D is a little quicker, but seems handicapped by being geared for the old 55 MPH speed limit. I don't want to drive that car at 3500 rpm all day, prefer to roll under 3000 rpm. I'd probably have to change the rear axle.

Serviceability-wise, I prefer the 240D OM 616.

Only thing easier is the OM636.

My two cents after having owned 5 X 240D cars and one W201.

Would love to put a 617 in a 201! Might not fit.

__________________
Strelnik
Invest in America: Buy a Congressman!

1950 170SD
1951 Citroen 11BN
1953 Citroen 11BNF limo
1953 220a project
1959 180D
1960 190D
1960 Borgward Isabella TS 2dr
1983 240D daily driver
1983 380SL
1990 350SDL daily driver alt
3 x Citroen DS21M, down from 5
3 x Citroen 2CV, down from 6

Forget that! I wanna put in a turbo 606!

__________________
John HAUL AWAY, OR CRUSHED CARS!!! HELP ME keep the cars out of the crusher! A/C Thread
"as I ride with my a/c on... I have fond memories of sweaty oily saturdays and spewing R12 into the air. THANKS for all you do!

My drivers:
1987 190D 2.5Turbo
1987 190D 2.5Turbo
1987 190D 2.5-5SPEED!!!

1987 300TD
1987 300TD
1994GMC 2500 6.5Turbo truck... I had to put the ladder somewhere!

The 240D, on all counts, is hands down the better car.

I would agree that the 240D is definitely built more durable. More simple means more reliable.

There's no question. The 240D is eons ahead.

When the last Mercedes-Benz diesel engine car is laid to rest, the drivers of those boneyarded ultra-modern MB diesels will ride home in 240Ds.

Can you really get 50 mpg with a 2.2 NA 5 speed 190D ? My odometer is broke so never checked mileage yet . That sounds awesome.

__________________
What Would Rudolph Do?
1975 300D, 1975 240D, 1985 300SD, 1997 300D, 2005 E320 , 2006 Toyota Prius

No, 50Mpg is not remotely possible in a 2.2 NA 190d, if you really try you can get upper 30's.

The W201 is way better than the W123. Its smaller, but handing, ride, climate controls, accessories, seats...all of it is better.

With the 2.2 601 engine its also super easy to work on.

With the auto trans, om601 in tip top condition, and 2.85 differential, I get about 26-29mpg city, and up to 35ish on the highway.

With the auto and tall differential its SLOW however. 0-60 on flat ground and good conditions is MAYBE 19 seconds or so...I'm sure my 420SEL can top 100mph before the 190 can hit 45

__________________
-diesel is not just a fuel, its a way of life-
'15 GLK250 Bluetec 118k - mine - (OC-123,800)
'17 Metris(VITO!) - 37k - wifes (OC-41k)
'09 Sprinter 3500 Winnebago View - 62k (OC - 67k)
'13 ML350 Bluetec - 95k - dad's (OC-98k)
'01 SL500 - 103k(km) - dad's (OC-110,000km)
'16 E400 4matic Sedan - 148k - Brothers (OC-155k)

I think Whunter claims his 190D gets 52 mpg.

__________________
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

Do you mean Mileage per 'Imperial Gallon'? You would be lucky to get upper 30 with 5-sp. My 190D is getting 30+ max.

__________________
Not MBZ nor A/C trained professional but a die-hard DIY and green engineer. Use the info at your own peril. Picked up 2 Infractions because of disagreements. NOW reversed.

W124 Keyless remote, PM for details. http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/mercedes-used-parts-sale-wanted/334620-fs-w124-chasis-keyless-remote-%2450-shipped.html

1 X 2006 CDI
1 x 87 300SDL
1 x 87 300D
1 x 87 300TDT wagon
1 x 83 300D
1 x 84 190D ( 5 sp ) - All R134 converted + keyless entry.

42mpg average, 53mpg all time high, so its definitely possible, question is how slow are you willing to go. A lot of other examples here.

The problem with the w201 is interior space. Its tiny even compared to the smallest modern cars. A ford Fiesta is positively huge but comparison.

__________________
CENSORED due to not family friendly words