380SE vs 420SEL?
 

My 82 300d is getting rusty, and I'm looking at a couple of possible replacements, both late-80's one a 380SE, and other a 420SEL. I'd appreciate any comments or opinions on relative complexity, common trouble spots, expected fuel economy. The SEL is a great hulking ark, isn't it?
Do they both have the same rear suspension?
Thanks seo

I have a 1989 420SEL. I love the car, but it is not fuel efficient at all.

surf your car is a prius compared to a 560SEL ;)

Thats the last free **** you get, Pal.:rolleyes:

the 420sel is a much better car.yes it has issues but they are known.the 380 was the worst engine in 30 yrs.

The 380 has the less efficient engine, but I am getting 16/21 with mine. There are all kinds of minor issues - sagging seats, window lifter guides, water seepage around the rear window, ACC controls. They can be considered a fun challenge, or a nightmare - depending on your tolerance and skill levels. The 14" tires are becoming hard to find.

The underbody will rust out quickly if there is a break in the undercoating. This can happen if someone lifts the car by the part that looks like a frame member underneath, instead of the lift points along the side of the body.

I am very familiar with both cars. The 420 is not worlds apart from the 380 in terms of power - they are similar regardless of what anyone else will tell you here. They are not rockets but are adequately powered and really come into their element on the highway. Only the 560 is much much faster, and I speak from personal experience.

My 85 380SE is in excellent mechanical shape and gives me 16mpg around town with a very heavy foot and the A/C on. On the highway under less heavy conditions and with the cruise on it gives just under 20mpg.

The long wheelbase models have unparalleled rear seat legroom, but the tradeoff is a vehicle that can be difficult to park and maneuver. Sort of like driving a cargo van, if you have ever done that before - takes lots of planning before making turns. The shorter wheelbase models seem a bit more nimble both in traffic and in the parking lot.

Either way, you can't lose with a W126.

The later 380SE ('84 & '85) with double row timing chain will be no better and no worse than a 420SEL save for the length of the wheelbase which is a matter of personal preference.

I find the opposite to be true, and due to the fact that nowadays only economy cars have 14 inchers the tires are becoming very cheap. Plenty of tires to choose from:

http://www.discounttire.com/dtcs/searchTiresByVehicleAndSize.do?rcz=75098&mk=MERCEDES%2520BENZ&rc=TXDINT&yr=1985&cs=205&vid=003141&rd =14&ar=70

I went with Kumho Power Star 758s. Great tire, and I paid $240 out the door including tax, disposal, new valve stems, mounting, lifetime rotate/balance.

A piker compared to the 603.97 rod bender :) In good shape an S350d will probably outrun a 380SE :D

There's also a 380SEL.

If you get an early 380, do so only if it has a double row chain.

Sixto
93 300SD

The 1984-85 380SE is a good car & with a good timing chain/tensioner will run a loooong time at 14-16MPG around town..

The 420SEL is more refined & starting in 1990 was one of the best MB's ever!
You still need a timing chain/tensioner every 150K miles.

I did the same. They work fine. I was really referring to H-rated tires which are the correct ones for this car. If you foolishly specify the make and model on TireRack, they won't let you order anything below H.

What changed in 1990?

I wonder why 1990-1991 420SEL's are better than 1986-1989 years?

Hey Surf: Not to change the subject,but what kind of milage are you getting on your Prius?

The only subjective improvement I can think of was the updated interior in 89.