85 DIesel, 49 state version?....What does that mean? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

lindajane · #1 09-01-2003, 02:25 PM

Hello,

I'm looking to buy a 1985 Diesel 300D, and a guy in LA who deals with Mercedes sent me this Message: "If you get an 85 Diesel, make sure it is a 49-state version. The CA model that year was terrible. Too much smog stuff, and the late 85 cars had a smaller transmission that wasn't strong enough."....Is this true, and How do I know this if the owner whos trying to sell it doesn't know this?...Is the transmission a problem?

I have done all this research, and thought that out of the years !983-85, of the turbo-diesels, that the 85 was the best year???

Pllease help....
THanks much,
Linda

sixto · #2 09-01-2003, 02:36 PM

Probably means that the 85 turbodiesels were delivered with a trap oxidizer, a device which in the simplest sense was more detriment than benefit to the environment. MB has a campaign (might still be in effect) to remove the trap oxidizer from any US spec car. There's more to the fix than that but that's basically what they do.

As such, I wouldn't worry about an 85 CA spec turbodiesel.

Sixto
95 S420
91 300SE
87 300SDL
83 300SD

Joe Blowe · #3 09-01-2003, 02:37 PM

he's sorta right, but not really...

by 1985, all of the diesel MBs shared the same Federalized emissions.

vwbuge · #4 09-01-2003, 11:53 PM

I don't know if Joe B. is correct. But I do know that the trap oxidizers were a problem. If you find a CA car that has one, call a MB dealer and have them run the VIN to see it the service work was performed. Other than that don't worry. My CA car has 299,000 on it and runs great!

Joe Blowe · #5 09-02-2003, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joe Blowe
he's sorta right, but not really...

by 1985, all of the diesel MBs shared the same Federalized emissions.

you know, i posted this as my wife was yelling at me to get a move on this morning (we were late for something, i can't remember).

anyway i stewed on it all day, and now that i think about it, i think

i meant to say that the diesel MBs were pretty much similar up until '85.

when '85 hit is when MB started piling on the emissions goodies in Calif.

i welcome all corrections and additions...

The Warden · #6 09-02-2003, 12:12 PM

IIRC, all 123 turbo diesels had identical engines from '82 to '84. All '85 123 diesels that were sold in states besides California are identical to '84 and older engines. All '85 diesels sold in California have the trap oxidizer. I think the same is true of the 126 diesels.

I went out to Texas to get my car

so no trap oxidizer or anything like that...

lindajane · #7 09-02-2003, 12:25 PM

SO....Does this mean I really should Stay away from 85 300D's from California (where I live), because of this trap oxider, smog stuff....Most Cars out here are from here....
Linda

Rick Miley · #8 09-02-2003, 01:51 PM

It usually bugs me when people ask different questions in the same thread, but in this case I wish you had done it. I think you should stay away from that 85 300D because:

1. 1985 has some specific parts, like the turbo and transmission that were used that year only. Finding replacements may be difficult.

2. The price sounds too high.

3. The man selling it told you he was honest and asked you to trust him. Hmm, I did that once. Just once.

There are members here from all over the country who love these cars and would be happy to help you shop for one. Make full use of this resource before you make a big mistake.

#9 09-02-2003, 04:27 PM

I have and 85 300CD. This is a coupe.
The 85 California model came with a trap oxidizer.
There was a factory recall. They would replace it Once. Some felt they would give you a new turbo, and a new exaust.
If it goes bad it will stop up, send particles thru turbo and ruin it and maybe also the engine.
Does this car have one. It is behind and below the turbo.Look's like a metal footbal. Plenty of info if you search under "trap oxidizer."
There was a transmission only for this year. And it is almost twice as costly as the 84.
One last thing.
Since they need more room for the trap they mounted the starter up side down with four bolts intead of two. Plus this starter cost a $100 more than the regular starter.
My car has the trap removed with a 84 exhaust system, and the regular starter.
Don't fall in love with the first car. Look find
one you like and then have a mechanic look it over.
Good luck.
Charlie

rwthomas1 · #10 09-02-2003, 06:02 PM

Linda,
It all depends on what you want and knowing what can go wrong with your car in the future. By the posts above the 85's are fine IF some key points are resolved. If there is a trap oxidizer it needs to go. Seems an 84 exhaust and starter will fit so I wouldn't worry there either. The "smog stuff" is easily defeated-disable the EGR and ARV by putting a BB in the vacuum lines or better yet making some block-off plates. Turn up the ALDA to wake up the pump, etc. Some mechanics will do this stuff, some won't, or you can learn how. Its not difficult. When it comes to the transmission MB transmissions usually last a long time if they have been maintained and not abused. Yes the 85 trans is more expensive than the 82-84 but thats because the cores are rarer. The cost of rebuilding yours shouldn't be any higher. Its replacing it that would cost a lot more. Since a good tranny shop can rebuild almost anything this wouldn't concern me at all. Bottom line is know what you may be getting into, be rational about the car, use what you know as a bargaining chip and walk away if the deal isn't what you want. Good luck, RT

gsxr · #11 09-03-2003, 12:40 PM

For the 123 only (don't know about 126), all had the same engine through 1983. In 1984, the Federal (49-state) cars had the same as the 83 engine, but CA got an air recirculation valve (ARV) on the turbo, plus a different air cleaner assembly. In 1985, the Federal cars got the same as the 84 CA - ARV, etc. But the 85 CA got a TOTALLY different setup, with the trap oxidizer, and a remote-mount air cleaner box on the fender. The dealer will remove the trap free if it is still present, however the replacement part looks almost the same. You do NOT get a new turbo or exhaust! That was only for the OM603 engines (86/87) which had the trap on top, upstream of the turbo. A failed trap on those cars could destroy the turbo, and if that happened the turbo was replaced free. That's not possible on the 123/617 setup. Also, the 603 cars moved the new oxidative catalyst downstream in the exhaust, so those cars got a new exhaust. The 123/617 setup did NOT require this - no free exhuast, sorry.

Anyway, the 1985 model is MORE desireable, IMO. It had a more sophisticated vacuum system for the transmission, which helped the problems that plagued all the previous 123/126 diesels (hard 1-2 shift, soft 3-4 shift, etc). The 85 got a taller final drive for quieter and more economical freeway cruising, and a looser torque converter to allow the engine to get into the powerband sooner at takeoff. The "smaller/weaker" tranny is a joke, I mean, come on - how many broken MB trannies do you know of? They wear out at 200-300kmi usually, but that goes for ALL of them, not the 85. Sheesh, some mechanics are really uninformed. You can disable the smog junk (EGR and ARV, and I highly recommend doing so) and turn up the ALDA a bit, since most of the later (84/85) cars were shipped pretty lean from the factory, along with lower wastegate settings (but that shouldn't matter as much as the ALDA tweak).

Anyway, Linda, if the price is decent and the car is in GOOD shape, don't worry about it being a 1985 CA version. Although if you could afford it, I'd step up to a 1987 300D, which is a MUCH better car all around - it just costs more! Of course I may be slightly biased (check my signature.)

Best regards,

#12 09-03-2003, 01:27 PM

I agree totally with Dave M.'s observations. The transmission is a great improvement as long as economy wasn't the goal! The fuel consumption of the '85 was about 5% inferior to that of the earlier cars (I attribute it to the much higher transmission stall speed). A reason to NOT want a CA '85 diesel is that many of the parts on the intake/exhaust are NOT the same as the other OM617.95 engines so many fewer used replacement parts are available and many dealers will not have some of the proper new parts in stock (being that there were many fewer CALIF diesels than 49 state diesels). Even after removing the trap, there will be an oxidative trap in it's place. The 49 state versions did not have this devcie (and the device will eventaully fail and require replacement

The '85 49 state model is the most desirable of the 123/126 OM617.95 diesels.

Marshall

lindajane · #13 09-03-2003, 01:32 PM

Hi,
The mechanic who is selling the 85...says the trap oxidizer is not a problem...the CA 85 models were recalled and they fixed the problem...no worries.....
Don't know what he's talking about!....I just hope he is being honest with me....
Linda

Zoonhollis · #14 09-03-2003, 04:41 PM

Good to see Marshall Booth --AKA "Der Dieseling Doktor"--posting here! I have gotten much good advice from the good doctor in the past, although I'm certain he would not remember me.

Wilkommen!

lorenztl · #15 09-05-2005, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marshall Booth

I agree totally with Dave M.'s observations. The transmission is a great improvement as long as economy wasn't the goal! The fuel consumption of the '85 was about 5% inferior to that of the earlier cars (I attribute it to the much higher transmission stall speed). A
The '85 49 state model is the most desirable of the 123/126 OM617.95 diesels.Marshall

I need to replace torque converter on my '85 300D. Would the converter from the '84 fit the '85 transmission without fitment issues. I would prefer a lower stall speed.

I noted a much quicker response when I replaced the factory torque converter on my 6.3 Diesel Chevy van with a lower stall converter.

Thank you, Tom