While I can't comment on the wagon since I never owned one, I'm pretty happy with the ML. Yes, the 98-00 years were considered problematic, but most (at least for me) were corrected under warranty while having other routine services performed. In other words, I've had little to no on-road issues with the SUV.

I prefer the ride height offered with the ML when taking long trips. I don't tow anything yet (so I opted for the 320 instead of the 430 for fuel savings) but it's nice to have when I eventually will.

I'm always hauling something on weekends, so the SUV suits me well. I'm the equipment manager for my daughter's soccer team, as well as a musician, so if I'm not hauling corner flags and soccer balls, I've got amps, speakers and flight cases. Otherwise, it's bags of mulch and flats of perennials on other occasions.

To me, the cargo height advantage is what steered me towards an SUV over a wagon. And for most of my hauling needs, this is essential.

__________________
2009 ML350 (106K) - Family vehicle
2001 CLK430 Cabriolet (80K) - Wife's car
2005 BMW 645CI (138K) - My daily driver
2016 Mustang (32K) - Daughter's car

I'm curious, would the 4matics use more fuel than the rwd models? Would it have better tractions on dry roads? I never had an awd vehicle before.

Yes, 4matics get slightly lower fuel economy because of extra weight.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

We have enjoyed our 210 wagon and intend to keep it for several more years.
However I may look at the G-wagon (G500) for my next hauler. Not as much cargo room as the 210 wagon however -very cool

__________________
2012 ML350 Bluetec 4-matic
1999 E320 4-matic Estate


"A ship in harbour is safe, but thats not what ships are built for". - John A. Shedd

http://www.varaderocigar.com/images/...ontecristo.gif

It appears to me that about half the 210 wagons are 4-matics. Even here in Texas there are many to be seen. AWD on a road car in Texas is about as pointless as it gets, IMHO. RWD was a requirement for my car, as I am unwilling to deal with the extra complexity and lower fuel economy of a 4-matic car.

Third seat was standard on U.S. 210 wagons. Also standard is the cargo cover/dog net.

Fool economy for the RWD 210 is 21/27 per the sticker. Adding 4-matic degrades both city & hwy by one MPG to 20/26.

Don't know that I'd recommend any one year 210 wagon over another. For the most part they are all pretty much the same with regard to reliability and build quality. Model year 2000 saw some restyling of the front end and also small improvements to the interior.

I have a 2001 210 RWD wagon and am mostly satisfied with it. I say mostly satisfied because it replaced a 124 turbo-diesel wagon that I would argue is the best MB wagon we've ever received in the U.S., giving the poor 210 some large shoes to fill.

- JimY