"Only motor with a history of problem" sounds a bit out of context, or the author is a lunatic. Was he referring to a particular chassis or era? The 3.0 liter 104 has all sorts of problems - including head gaskets, premature valve jobs (mine at 40k), weak, expensive and virtually irreplaceable igntion control modules - just to name a few. Not a great engines all thing considered. That same magazine has referred to it as a cob job rushed to market and then fixed with the 3.2.

The phrase you quoted is out of context, and it refers to 300CE/E320 chassis. FWIW, this author also says:

"Early W124 sedans had some issues like duplex timing chains in the engines, but by the time the CE came along in 1988, the mechanicals were bullet-proof....Built in the era just before on-board electronics became all pervasive, they are relatively simple and inexpensive to maintain, promising faithful and reliable service if properly looked after."

I'm just learning about these cars, but one thing I wonder about is, just how "simple and inexpensive" they are to maintain. That's not my impression, anyway.

If simple to maintain is important I'd go for an 88-89 103 motor. You don't lose much in driveabilty - I think the 3.0 liter 104 motor only gained 6 ft lbs of torque and of course weighed more.

Budget for $1500-2000 a year in maintenance costs on any W124.

__________________
Kent Christensen
Albuquerque
'07 GL320CDI, '10 CL550. '01 Porsche Boxster
Two BMW motorcycles