e320 96-97 versus 98-02
 

I am looking to buy a E320 96 or 97 because I like the M104 engine. Good experience 180K and is running perfect.My concern is what transmission shoud I chose?
I know that some of the model come with 722.605 and some of them with 722.329
Now the tough question: Does anybody know the difference between those? Also how can I identify the type of the transmission that is on the car?
Thank you

To the best of my knowledge, all 97s came with the 722.605 transmissions.

Easiest way to tell is the "W or S" button next to the shift knob. The previous 722.329 did not come with this feature.

You can do a search, this has been talked to death...some of the early 722.605 needed valve body updates and many have suffered an early death.

From personal experience, I have a 97 E320 with the 722.605 transmission. Car is at 110K has no problems as of yet. Transmission was serviced with original MB fluid at 60K.

Good luck.

So the 722.605 is five speed adaptive AT. I agree with you on changing the oil even though the book said "Lifetime transmission oil". Now as far as performance how do you compare it to the old mecanical 722.433 or xxx.329? What other thinks shoud I know about 96-97 e320.
Does the head gasket and wiring harness are still the problems. How about the evaporator it is prone to failure, and if it is how hard is to change it.
I want to mention that I am not afraid of anything as far as repairs.

Here's what I can tell you about transmission 722.6XX vs. 722.3/4XX. It's true, the 722.6 has had it's share of problems but it's DIY friendly. Since it has no brake bands, it's much easier, IMHO, to tear down and re-build. Any DIY'er equipped to remove and re-install the transmission should have no trouble re-building it. I also like the M104 engine. However, despite what I've read in this Forum as well as others, even the new and improved head gaskets can fail. I've seen it happen many times. My own '94 E320 had the improved head gasket installed in 1997 and I just recently replaced it due to an external coolant leak. I wouldn't let this influence the decision of which engine is more reliable though. After all, the 104 head gasket is a great DIY job. The parts are cheap and the savings in labor costs are huge! The wiring harnesses haven't been much of a problem on 210's either. I could go on forever about the pros and cons of these cars but in the end they really are great. Keep in mind though, that beginning in 1998 the 210's really became different animals. The entire vehicle is networked, meaning all accessories (windows, sunroof, seats, etc. )send and recieve signals via a databus. This is NOT very DIY friendly. Personally, my choice would be the '97 E320.

Thanks for the detailed information. I know that 98 and up is the best friend of the mechanics(because is easy to make money on its repairs) so I am staying away from it. Also I know abot a recall for spring purch, coming out of the chasis because of the rust. Did you have knowledge about it? Also 97 e420 can be a choice? but The m119 is full of trobles and does not last 300k. I am the 60k/year type of driver.
Thanks again,

My 97 e320 has had absolutely no problems except for worn lower control arms causing a shimmy at highway speeds. No head gasket issues so far. Car burns absolutely no oil and no coolant leaks.

The 98-00 cars did have the harmonic balancer issue, but an easy fix if found early enough.

The M119 V8 is a very tough engine, just try to put enough miles on it to wear it out.

As to the spring perch issue early W210's with the heavy engines seem to be affected the most. Ie the 1996-99 E300D's and 1997-99 V8 powered cars. Although very few 98 and newer cars seem to have spring perch problems.

If you drive 60k a year I would think a lower mileage E300D would be the best choice. You should get low to mid 30's on the highway.

The 5spd "sealed for life" is a nice trans, I would change the fluid every 80k-100k and it should cost you about $200. My friend just paid the dealer $175 to do his two weeks ago.

I don't know who's right but this certainly doesn't synch with what my mechanics is saying - he thinks the 722.6 is at least twice as expensive to rebuild and maybe three times as expensive. Some of this is parts, the 722.6 parts (according to him) are available only from the dealer and are well over a thousand dollars. As a good as a 722.6 is supposed to be it scares me. And there seems to be an awful lot of failures for whatever reason. Another mechanic told me he had a friend at a dealership who had personally rebuilt over 500 of them - working at one dealership.

Huh? The M119 is one of the most durable gasoline engines ever shoehorned between and MB's front fenders. In use in the R129, W140, C140 and W210 chassis it has proven to be incredibly reliable. There are some very minor problems like oil tubes, but otherwise in 4.2L and 5.0L form, there are thousands upon thousands of them with crazy high mileages and virtually no wear.

Hi deanyel, your mechanic is only partially correct concerning the price of 722.6 parts. True, the valve body and control unit will cost about $1500 but the majority of these transmissions can repaired for far less. With accrued mileage the tolerances can increase to the point where it affects the shift quality. The tolerances can be adjusted during re-assembly by using the correct size retaining snap rings. There are six of them and they cost around five bucks each. The one way roller clutches may be the most common problem and cause a variety of problems. These can be replaced as well. There are two of them and they cost about thirty bucks each. I've seen various internal seals fail as well. The seal kit for the complete transmission only costs about sixty dollars. The valve body can be dis-assembled and thoroughly cleaned as an option to replacing it. In the early days of the 722.6 this was the standard procedure and it was usually successful. Of course I've also seen my share of catastrophic failures as well. In these cases re-building was not an option. I've re-built both 722.3/4 and 722/6 many times and I can say without hesitation that the 722.6 is much simpler. As to which one is more reliable is a matter of opinion.

There are a lot of 722.6's running around with 200k+ on them. They can't be that bad. Besides with any trans 250k is about all you can expect after that all bets are off.

i got 340,000 and working right on a w126 diesel