S-class fiasco revisited
 

Turn back the clock 40 years...

What was the general feeling when the W112 (fintail 300SE) replaced the W189 (300d)? Did folks think MB was going gadget crazy with air suspension and that funky speedometer? Did MB offer more car for the money? Is anyone old enough to have been around then?

Sixto
91 300SE
87 300SDL
83 300SD

My Dad bought a used 1965 300SE LWB around 1970. This was because I wrecked his 1965 220SE.

The 300Se was magnificent. The air suspension provided an unparalled ride. The engine was very powerful, and complex, and the exhaust hote was heaven. We used to drive the car alond at what seemed a reasonable and comfortable speed which turned out to be about 80 mph.

Brakes, that car had brakes. Legroom, that car had legroom. Oh the leather seats. No A/C though. Terrible in the Washington D.C. area.

Did I mention the complex engine?

Anyway, he sold it because he was transferd overseas. I offered to keep it while I was in university but no deal. I was stuck with the Toyota.

Sad but true.

Can't speak to the other 300 though.

Not old enough to have been around, but my view would be that there would have been a slightly less amount of controversy.
Maybe some snickers about the fins, true. Much the same way BMW'ers are balking at the general look of the new 7.
With the latest S debate, I think there is alot of general concern because of the shift back to a lower, slimmer appearing car (and lighter) compared to the 140 chassis car, plus the appearance of the 220 was relatively close to the Daimler-Benz/Chrysler merger, which made alot of enthusiasts believe that this sleeker appearing car was somehow the result of this merger (like for some reason suddenly the S class was a gussied up Concord, although obviously the 220 chassis was designed much earlier than the DB/C merger).

Gilly