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.

Because suckers like us keep buying their cars of "high maintenance, poor quality, expensive electronic/computerized parts".

Where do you think MB's rust/corrosion warranty stand in the industry? You won't believe this. It is the lowest in terms of number of years and mileage. Take a look at the attached.

So far as safety, performance, handling and economy, I think the newer Mercedes are better built.
In terms of quality of materials and craftsmanship, like the type of wood, leather, and chrome interiors seen on the '50s - '60s cars, no.

In terms of reliability, Mercedes has over the past 10 - 15 years been rated pretty low compared with leaders such as Honda or Toyota, due to things like wiring harnesses that biodegrade, harmonic balancers that fly apart, Spring perches that dissintegrate, or power steering hoses that blow off the radiator because some engineer forgot that brass fittings for rubber hoses should have a barb or bead made onto the tip!
I have heard rumors that, perhaps, Mercedes reliability has started to improve on the latest models.

As for the excuse I've heard that one should expect teething troubles with cutting edge technolgy - I say a customer who pays the price to own a Mercedes, shouldn't expect to be the test driver for the carmaker.

And if we are to compare durability of recent Mercedes, to those of 30 or 40 years ago, perhaps we should hear from people that owned those past Mercedes when they were new.

Finally, as someone already mentioned, I believe it's going to be tough to keep much of todays overly complex electronic technology working when it gets to be 20 - 30 years old, regardless of whether it's a Mercedes or a Toyota.

Happy Motoring, Mark

That about sums it up. Damn the new ones drive nice, and have a ton of power. You also don't have to work on them every weekend, or much at all really.

If I could afford a new MB thats what I would drive, hopefully when I get out of school.

Personaly I don't want a 20 year old daily driver. Why waste time that could be spent on better things messing with an old car so you can get to work the next day? I rather have 20 year old cars as weekend toys.

This is a good thread.

I have asked myself a similar question. Assume I'm planning on buying a new MB and have the following two options: Option A, go to the dealership this afternoon, pick out the MB I like, pay the nice man a fair amount of money and drive it home. Option B, (and this one requires a bit of imagination) step into my time machine, set the date back 15 years, and go to the same dealership. Pick out the MB I like, pay the nice man a fair amount of money, and drive my new MB into my time machine. Set the date forward 15 years to now and finish the drive home. Which is the better option? By the way, the time machine has a small quirk--any money transported through time is automatically adjusted for inflation. So to have $45k to spend 15 years ago, I'll have to step into the time machine today with about $66K in my pocket.

J. M. van Swaay

I know three people who bought W126 diesels new. One was a cop, who hated it to death, because it never would start when it was cold. For example he went out to dinner in the winter and the car would leave them stuck in the parking lot..this was a brand spankin new 300SD. Dealer couldn't figure it out, kept it for only a year and traded for a 300E.

Another was an attorney, he liked his. Bought a 1984 300SD. Drove it for three years and about 40k miles never popping the hood.:D It started to knock, traded it in.

Lastly was an owner of a trucking company. Bought it for his wife, wife hated, drove it for a couple of years and sold it to a dentist. Dentist sold it to me a couple of years ago, and now its gone.

The lesson is? The original owners couldn't care less they were just cars and dumped them quickly. Not all thats different from what they are doing today.

I'm probably qualified to comment on the subject: I have always done my own work. I owned a 220Sb in the 60's and a 230SL in the 70's. Now I have a W113 280SL and just bought a '95 E320 wagon. The older cars were simpler. As a result,when stuff went wrong, they are easy to repair. The newer cars ride nicer and have more power and lot's more gadgets: Do you really need 8-way adjustable seats powered by electric motors? Do you need a fully automatic climate control system? Do you need a "sound system" or would be a radio good enough? Do you need power windows and Airbags? An electric sunroof ? Isn't the purpose of a car to get you from here to there? My W113 has a manual soft top & manual windows. But let's look at it from the manufacturer's point of view: They can out-do the competition by offering a fully automated coffee maker built into the armrest and sell more cars because of that, or just get a glowing review in Car&Driver. The dealer doesn't mind and the repair show likes it too. And if you buy the car, you deserve it.

I commute 45 minutes each day in traffic. At my disposal I have my 82 300SD my 99 S320 and an 88 Volvo 240 wagon. I pick the 140 most of the time because of the extra creature comforts. When your driving a short distance the extra options don't matter. When the distance increases they become more important. The 140 is quiet as a tomb inside and has great A/C and a comfortable ride. I can talk on my mobile phone and people don't even realize I am in the car. You can't really do that with an older car.

There is a big difference in design and technology for cars. The newer cars have an advantage of technology. Electronic ignition and a myriad of other technological innovations that have made them easier to own. The older cars have design advantages such as the lack of built in failure. Quite honestly modern cars are designed to break no matter what lies the corporations spread to cover up their trickery. The simple reason is an economic one rather than an engineering one. Mercedes depends on customers buying new cars and servicing old cars to stay in business and to make their stockholders happy.

The older cars lack of technology supplied this revenue previously. Oil changes every 3K miles and spark plugs and other A and B services pay for a lot. The newer cars have 100K plugs and longer service intervals meaning less money. The money is really in that $700 computer module thats made from $20 worth of electronic components that they only have the information on.

As a car buyer you have to look at what features you value the most and the cost factors involved. I decided to go with a 140 because it was a good balance between some of the things I liked and did not like. While some of the features of the 220 and 221 appeal to me the repair costs and lower build quality did not. And of course the new 221 is really easy on the eyes!

The newer cars in general are probably not going to survive the test of time because of design issues. They have engineered failure in them. In my opinion the 1999 model 140 and the 2002 129 and the 1995 124 were the last well made Mercedes cars ever built. If you notice a lot of changes in technology appeared afterwards and a lot of recycling emblems started appearing on the parts. The "disposable era cars". The newer MB's are nice but they have a future date with a recycling bin.

Fully agree. But I do belive the new cars will let you down significantly more often than the old ones. The retirment of 126 in 91 was the last of MBs reputation of ruler or reliability and durability and I will also say styling. Although thank god, styling has comeback with a vengance at MB in the last 5 years. But lets face it MB's customer base is not the person who runs a diesel to 1M miles, those are the second hand MB owners. The trend today is toward disposable cars. Buy on warenty sell on warenty.

And what is the value of all this new technology? An 89 107 will out sell a 90 129 of equal milage by a fair margin, despite the significant improvments in performance, fuel economy, having a real sound system, power roof and other modern features.

Today there are only 2 reasones to buy a Mercedes

1st reason: You look good
2nd reason: You look good

That will be my sales pitch when I retire from Sikorsky Aircraft and start selling MB's.

John Roncallo

The earliest electronic fuel controlled systems that I'm aware of were the early D-jet analog systems - some of them date from the late 60's and I'm not aware of any significant number of failures and you can still find loads of parts from junkyards and FI control units are still available from MB.

BMW and Porsche started to use integrated fuel and ignition systems (MOTRONIC) in the early 80's - millions of these cars are still on the roads after nearly 30 years with no problems at all. I suspect the majority of the early E30's that are now entering junkyards are doing so with their factory installed MOTRONIC control units still in place and untouched since the day they were installed in Germany 3 decades ago.

I don't deny electronic engine controls can be difficult and expensive to fix but the fear of "black boxes" is a bit overblown IMHO.

Let's see if anyone else would join me.

If MB still makes and sells the 1991 - 1992 300E new today for $50k, I am in for 2. It might need a head gasket but that is only about a costly service of the new cars.

Newer cars breaks down more often or they just limp home or stay at the dealers, LOL.
Newer cars cost more to diagnose when they break down.
Newer cars rust more easily (compare W210 to W124 to 1993).
Newer cars depreciate much more than the older new cars (early W210 price is approaching later W124 now).

In the mid 1990's, one buys a 5 year old MB for about 1/2 the new price. Nowadays, one can buy a 5 year old MB for about less than 1/3 of the new price. For example, many 2002 E320's are in the low and mid teens in price they cost more than $50 new with options. The market knows what is good and not so good.

I think you will start to see the cars past 1990 ish time frame will be less likely to make it past 25 years mostly because of there complexity and lack of parts support. Just think about it you need a new computer for you DAS equipt 1996 SL600 in the year 2021. Go to yopur local dealer part has been discontinued. You can buy one but you cant start the car with it because its coded to some other car.

Aftermarket injection systems are going to become a big seller when OE injection parts become obsolete.

On the other hand corrosion protection has become better in most cases so the usual age killer will allow these cars to live on longer.

John Roncallo

Currently you can go to a Mercedes parts counter and get anything as small as an ashtray or trim item on any post WWII Mercedes. It might cost a small fortune and have to be sent in from Germany but how much is that worth knowing you can get anything for your car? American and Japanese makers are the ones that turn their backs on their cars when they are a facelift or two old.

Parts support is one of the reason's many owners like us keep these cars around for so long. Its easy to drive a 25 year old car when you can do small repairs and keep it in good cosmetic condition. When your japanese car's seats are threadbare and you have lost a knob off of the A/C its junkyard time or just put up with it time.

There is also supply and demand. Look at production numbers. When you have a glut of used units on the market and not a lot of buyers the price goes down. Most people buying an E class buy them new and dump them after a few years when it no longer impresses the neighbors. People like ourselves that admire the quality of these cars are few and far between as most owners buy the cars just for the name and ego boosting powers. How many self respecting mini mansion dwellers could deal with the humiliation of being seen in last years model E class? Let alone one that was USED! :)

cdplayer
 

I agree. They should be reliable. But my personal experience has told me otherwise. Both my cars are in my sig. My daily driver (1984 500SEC and 2001 S500.)

Keep in mind the newer cars have far more tech equipment. Hence far more problems will occur. But the quality of the manufacture in the newer MB has really put me off. Especially in the 2001 to the 2004 products. Many threads in this forum have suggested this.

I have spent roughly $7,000(not including tires and wheels) on my SEC replacing and repairing because I wanted to in aprox. two years.
Repairs on the S500 has topped $11,000 because I had to. I.E. collasped suspension two days after I bought it. Failed K40 relay. Failed navagation.
Failed ignition. Failed gearshift position sensors. On and on.
Search "S500 home at last" for more.

I love 'em both though. And, knock on wood, the S500 is now running beautifully.:)

I see enough posts on these forums from people having to deal with ailing D-Jet systems, and many years ago my parents were afflicted with an unreliable D-Jet equippeed VW Squareback so perhaps I'm biased. It's one reason why my latest Mercedes purchase was a 240D.
Now my daily-driver, a '98 Nissan Altima has electronic fuel injection (recently treated to a $300 mass airflow sensor) twin airbags and an electronically-controlled automatic tranny. But I still prefer to keep my vintage vehicles simple.
And it's not just the electronic fuel-injection systems, but the proliferation of all the other 'black boxes' for airbags, antilock brakes, stability control, navigation systems, security systems, etc...
Cars that still have decent bodies and interiors will be junked because the cost to diagnose and repair these systems will exceed the cars value.
And finding someone competent enough to properly diagnose these electronic systems is already a problem. Ask my neighbor, whose relatively simple '96 Corolla took two tows to the shop, where the 'mechanic' finally got the car running after installing two distributors, one ECU and a crank angle sensor, to the tune of about $800!

Happy Motoring, Mark

It's all relative. I think that not too long ago, Mercedes products were world class and MB reliability and durability was the envy of most makers. When cars were first ranked on such things beginning in the late 80's, MB stood on top. Today, they have been caught and surpassed by most makes and now sit in the basement of rankings with respect to quality.

In many ways, the newer MB's are better, but better is not enough when it's possible to buy much better from other makes.

I prefer driving our C230 compared to our Subaru, but the Subaru is much better made. I am not even remotely considering replacing the C230 (which is a very reliable and well made car, the best MB we've owned) with another MB product. The newer Japanese products we've had are just too good. Check engine lights? Never. Electronic failures? Never. Emissions controls failures? Nope. In six years and 180K our Scoob has required almost no non-service repairs. The HVAC blower motor failed a coupe years back. That's it. The stereo works like new, the power accessories all work perfectly, the SRS system has never given a fit, the air-mass-meter (or whatever it has) has never failed, the fuel level sensors have never broken, the vacuum system for the fuel system (emissions) has never had a part fail. Spring perches are not rusting, control arms are not in need of replacing and the paint work looks great. The HVAC control system works and seems like it always will.

If you compare the ownership of our Subarus (this is our third) to our MBs (a series of them too) the Subarus are vastly superior in terms of build quality and reliability. They're a different driving experience, but after years of nursing MB products through odd fits of diagnosing expensive problems, I've had it. As long as the C230 stays strong, I'll keep it (the driveline is like new at 240K) but it won't be replaced with another Flying Star. I just don't have the patience for it...

Well I'm betting in 10 years my W126 will be worth more than any W140.

W140's are dropping in value like rocks, W126's seem to be holding steady. Good diesels have been commanding premiums for years.

I wonder what the cost of repairing a 220 will be when it's 15-18 years old. One look at all the wiring and electronics in those freaked me out!

I have only owned three 124 AMG:s and two G-wagens, but I find my E36 AMG Coupé and the G500 good enough to keep when I compare to newer models. They are almost bullet proof and there is nothing on the more recent models that I find "better", not even the looks.

Perhaps a future "Gullwing" I have seen on renderings would do... :)

I dunno about that. Depends on the 140. Most of the 140's that I have seen are dogs with cracked leather interiors and malfunctioning systems. I think the well maintained 140's will still be worth more than a 126. Look at the 6.3's and 6.9's for an example. There are dirt cheap 6.3's and 6.9's because they are rough. The ones in really good shape sell quickly for a LOT of money.

The 140 is not yet old enough to be a "classic" car since production ended in 1999. When the flock starts to thin with some of the bad cars being junked there will be less of them around. They also are rather etched in the history books because of the Princess Di accident. I have seen 140's range in price from $7000 for an older crappy one to in the low 30's for low production S600's. Keep in mind there is a cult following for the 140 because of the build quality in comparison to the other cars.

The 126's have the same resale issues as well. Many of the early 380SEL's from the early production are already beginning to die off. Not to mention the $1000 something pricetag the early 380SEL's are selling for. Those 1992 $7000 300SE's are just like the 80's 380SEL's.

Depends on what your looking at in "better made". If you consider cheap hard interior plastics and cloth seats to be "better made" more power too you. It really depends on the mission of the car. The Mercedes is a luxury car while he Subaru is a mass market car sold mostly to middle class consumers.

An example. A friend of mine has had several service visits for his $10k Sub Zero fridge. Does that make my $1000 Frigidare better made? His fridge has a lot more features and systems and will easily last for 30 years. When my fridge goes out it goes into a landfill.

I have not been so fortunate. I cannot get the plastic under the pading for the convertable top cover for an 88 560SL. I cannot get the three chrome pieces just above the tail lights and licence plate. And a sun visor cost $500.00.

John Roncallo

The 123 and 126 cars were built by engineers who designed a fine motorcar, then let the sylists wrap a body around their creations - then they figured out what they had to sell it for - these cars are the last of the chrome and steel tanks. After that the marketing people apparently got control of MB and said: What can you build that I can sell for $38,500? From a block away you can recognize a 123 or 126 as a Mercedes. From a block away from a new MB, you can't tell whether it's an MB or a ricer. If you could fast-forward one of these late model "marketing marvels" to 25 years old with 250K or 350K miles I think you'd be disappointed.

How many dealerships have you been to? Its just a matter of knowing the "right" part number. Additionally the "classic center's" at many dealerships can track down hard to find parts that the service counter guy's can't. Many times a parts person just cant be bothered to spend hours tracking down trim pieces that don't have a high pricetag. :)

Uh, yes actually it does.

I guess I'm just a bit strange but I'd rather have a fridge that doesn't require a tech visit every couple of months than one with a lot of "features and systems" that does. If your on the other side of this one Mercedes is definitely the car for you. As for me I'm with John (blackmercedes) - when the new CDI Accord arrives in 2009 I'm done with MB.

Off topic, but Sub Zero's are junk. If you want to get a high end fridge don't get a Sub Zero.

I have a Frigidare as I never really eat in and cook that much and I don't live in a mini mansion where it would look appropriate anyway.

Honda and Mercedes have different groups they are marketing to. I had a 2002 Accord I bought new that was a complete piece of crap. The doors closed like they were made from recycled soda cans and the whole car felt cheap. Oil changes were at every 3750 miles and it was in the shop more than any of my MB's for just oil services. Sitting around in a waiting room with no loaner car available every 3750 miles is not my idea of fun. I don't mind spending the extra money for a car thats much better construction quality and does not have to be in the shop constantly for just oil changes. Additionally I would rather be in any MB than a Honda in the event of an accident. The Japanese only engineer their cars to do well on the test not for the real world.

Go test drive one of those Honda's and I'm sure you will buy one. Just wait a few months and wonder why it is you miss your Mercedes again. I had a troublesome 1998 Volvo S70 and after a month with my top of the line 2002 Accord I wanted the troublesome Volvo back. Japanese cars just lack soul and passion. Its like driving a washing machine.

That is VERY well said and I agree with every word of it. The W123, W124 and W126 are the last of the unarguably pure Mercedes.

There is a lot of good left to be found in the W201, W202, W210 and W140 but those cars do show the shift from engineering to other priorities.

Beyond that, except for the safety commitment, each car offered squanders the Mercedes Benz legacy of Gottlieb Daimler and Karl Benz.

They dare not use the company's old motto, "The Best...or Nothing" any more because it would be an utter lie, all the Mercedes Benz cars are being sold on the basis of their PRICE.

The sad thing is that the current buyers are too stupid to know the difference. Most of the newer Mercedes cars are being sold for name recognition only as icons of wealth rather than the superior engineering that they stood for before.

But then again we only have ourselves to thank for the changes Mercedes has gone through. Companies evolve to conform to market conditions. Mercedes designs and builds what will sell. Because the majority of buyers of these cars only keep them for a few years so they can show everyone how wealthy they are Mercedes does not put a lot of effort anymore into making these cars last anymore.

Many other technologies have gone this way. We don't repair VCR's anymore for example. Recent developments in computer technology have developed the concept of "e-waste". The car is the next frontier of disposable technology for consumers that want the latest and greatest and are willing to throw away and spend to get it.

I've test driven and had as loaner cars about twelve different new MBs over the last five years. Sure, they are nice and the a/c works great and there's never a puddle under them. But in my view, not one of those cars comes even close to the road feel in my 124s. The new ones are more like bubbles on wheels, reminiscent more of the kind of ride I got in the Lincoln Mark IVs I drove in college. I am not interested in floating along the road and not feeling it, if I'm going to drive, I want to know it and not operate it by a kind of remote control.

In my opinion, a Mercedes C-class is not a luxury car.

Let's also not forget something about the supposed huge gap in quality/durability/reliability between "older" Mercedes and "newer" Mercedes. My 1983 300CD's price when new when translated into 2005 $ value would cost somewhere between $70,000 and $80,000.

Mercedes simply can't build cars to that standard any longer. Who in their right mind would purchase a car like our old W123s and pay that kind of money for them? Relative to what it used to cost to buy a Mercedes, the newer ones are a tremendous value.

The Subaru WRX and STi are pretty well built and far better than any MB C class I have driven, as for luxurious, well can't be compared, both the WRX and STi are geared toward sports based on their rally heritage.

Those who plan to keep their micro-chip laden vehicles for decades should check out the thread "Primitive car = good" on the Diesel Forum.

Happy Motoring, Mark

I drive my 1991 W126 daily....I love it.... and will not give her up for a newer Benz.