Older mb's Built better than the new Mb's?
 

I was hearing from a few people that the older Mbs are Better cars than the ones they are coming out with now. Is that true or a myth? thanks

The truth

Better in what way?
"Better" is a state of mind.

New cars get better mileage.
New cars put out less pollution
New cars have better technology
New cars do better in crashes (save lives).....................................................
New cars require much LESS maintenance!
Old cars are easier to easier to work on unless you have a 1973-77 230 or 280.

I used to believe that until I compared my maintenance records and parts purchased on my 2001 SLK230 to my 1982 240D, 1984 190D, and 1993 190E.

It is my belief that the newer MB's require less maintenance, offer much more passenger safety, better interior, and are better built. What really intrigues me is when I compare the base price of the new 2008 C class to my 1993 190E. You are getting more car for the money.

I do believe that newer cars are much much better as MR. M.B.DOC said.

I like the old ones, but more stuff goes wrong on older cars. The newer ones are better to drive and should be more reliable, even with all the new components on them.

Wait till the newer cars are as old as the older ones. In another word, wait till your 2001 SLK230 is in year 2026 (if it is still on the road).

Just do not think you can compare the maint cost of a 6 years old car with a 25 year old car.

Ok maybe i didnt ask the Question correctly. Let me Try agian... Nevermind that the Older cars are Older ofcourse they are. Each car is going to get old. Of course newer cars are not going to need much mantianence as the older cars. But what i am trying to say is the new cars are going to get as old as the older cars we have now.. i am saying each MB when they are 20-30-40 years old. From whatever year they were built. To they stay sturdy and reliable as when these newer cars get to the age our older cars are at now. If this makes anysense.... So when these newer cars get to be 20-25 years old. would you want a 20-25 year old 89mb or a 25 year old 2006-7-8 MB.

The jury is still out on that one. As you say, how will today's vehicles hold up when they are the age of your '89 perhaps?

All I know is reliability is subjective...after all, unless you own the vehicle since inception and are fastiduous with maintenance, you never really know what the standard is for reliability.

For most of us that own older MBs, we picked them up after a decade or so of service, perhaps one or more previous owners, and questionable service records.

That said, there was probably some cost involved to get the vehicle up to par with driveability and safety (knowing well that it won't be 100%...there is always some quirky gremlin that can never be solved).

Once past the initial dumping of money and parts, age and entropy dictate everything else. With hundreds of parts that are close to or past their useable lifecycles, there's a lot that can (and will) go wrong. This is a reality for pretty much any product.

I will add however, that the aged versions that MB has produced are technologically primitive compared to the current crop, and thus, parts are far cheaper to replace and diagnosis is less of a hassle.

I can only imagine what it would be like owning my W164 a couple of decades from now, and having to troubleshoot with a proprietary scanner and a laptop, only to discover that some $2300 part needs replacing.

All the computer parts that can fail when 20+ years old will likely be VERY expensive at that point....as the stuff will be so ancient technologically. On the old MB's...no computers...just a bunch of relatively simple parts that are easy to replace. I've ridden in new MB's and will gladly admit they are nice and would love to own one (c220cdi wagon w/6 speed stick preferably)...but I also love my older W126.

That is a "better" question. Would I have a 15-20 Yr old W220 chassis...?? NO

Would I spend $ 4500 for a mid 90's MB with a M104 engine that needed a $2K throttle,
a 10 Hr head gasket job, or a $1200 engine wiring harness...NO!

I would have a 1970 250C or a 1985 300CD...

I have to agree with MB Doc. However, put me down for a 1972 280SE Convertible. I would settle for the 2.8 six as well.

I wouldn't say my 1972 280se was better built than say our current 124's.

The big difference for me is electronics. I don't like them and don't understand them. I can keep our cars on the road for a long time since almost everything just bolts and unbolts.

Some jobs are time consuming like water pumps and A/C, but still very do-able.

And almost everything makes logical sense....with the exception of the belt tensioner.

I am sure however that a newer Mercedes is a better ride.

This is a fascinating theme!
I'd try to put in different terms:
When compared to the INDUSTRY leaders how do the current MBs versus the old ones?
In other words: are we still the best ?
How about the solutions proposed by the new kids on the block ?
Jorge

Yeah, you're probably right loubapache. And, I'll bet my 1971 454 Corvette Roadster will still be on the road in 2026 and my 2001 SLK230 won't. Does that mean GM is better than Mercedes?
What year do you predict that MB will go out of business if they continue producing high maintenance, poor quality, expensive electronic/computerized parts?
We all need a crystal ball.

For those of you that remember shopping at a MB dealership in the '60's and '70's, I think you'd agree that the sales and service philosophy has changed. There wasn't the mass produced feeling that you get today when you go to the sales lot. The service department was small, with German mechanics that really knew their stuff, fewer models to choose from, and cars that were sold to last. Now, a 3 or 4 year lease along with a 4 year warranty sells the car.

Maybe I was just trying to be optimistic in my earlier post about MB quality....and hoping for some good karma.

Yes better body and engines that outlasted all, could be passed off from generation to generation, the new ones are nowhere near the old ones.