Chrysler influence on 300E series/Benz's in General

[benzborg]

A bit off topic perhaps but I'm trying to find links to put a raging debate to bed. My aging Benz mechanic who spent years working for Mercedes in Germany has for some years expressed his conviction that after the late eighties he won't touch any 300Es since as he says it "That's when Chrysler started making them". He's even pointed out to me how early 300E rear end suspension was downgraded to very light control arms in the rear compared to eariler 80s 300Es. That parts in general weren't as reliable as the earlier MBs and paint, quality of metal etc went downhill as well.

Since then whenever I raise this issue debate follows and being unable to find any links that point to anything the "old boy" is on about I'm wondering if he knows something we don't or does he have his wires crossed altogether?


thanks in advance.

BB

[JohnM.]

Sounds like a case of a QUACKY CANADIAN if you ask me.

Plus Chrysler didn't merge with Daimler-Benz until 1998, nothing really to fact check here.

[mbzman]

I don't think your mechanic's argument has any validity. The W124 was a well made car from the start until the end of production in 1995. I've sat and driven in a late W124 and they feel as every bit as solid as a early W124. I don't think the decline in engineering and material quality came so early. It was more of a gradual transition starting in the late 1990s.

[Gilly]

I think he uses "Chrysler" as a generally disparaging term, not literally.
I think he's really old school and can't accept that like everyone else, the cars had to become more energy efficient and ecologically sound. All the manufacturers, esp in the US had a terrible time period for paint, trying to make the painting process meet EPA standards. Things had to become lighter, the whole car had to become lighter to meet fuel standards and people wouldn't have continued buying them if they were getting 15 mpg when the competition got 25 or 30. EVEN if they were built like a tank.
A good thread to insert a favorite song line of mine, it's from Billy Joel's "Keeping The Faith"; The good old days weren't always good and tomorrow's not as bad as it seems.

Gilly

The ONLY connection between Chrysler and Daimler before 98 was the occasional usage of specific automatic climate control components. Isn't it funny that these automatic climate controls were CLEARLY the worst climate control systems ever put an an MB. In fact, they might be the worst automatic climate control systems ever put on an AUTOMOBILE!

[RBYCC]

The 124 chassis design and development was probably one of the most over engineered vehicles built by Mercedes.

I've owned a C124 since new when it was introduced in 1988.
Also own a 1994 A124.

No difference in quality from the earliest to the last car built.

No connection to Chrysler in design, specification or parts.

Mercedes quality started to diminish in the late 90's
The 202's and 140's along with the 129's were still decent builds.

[babymog]

I agree with all above. As an Engineer, who worked on Mercedes projects with Mercedes' Engineers, my experience is a bit different.

The 124, 201, early 140s, and R129 were the last IMO of the Engineers' cars. Marketing decided much more after this point.

Mercedes-Benz never merged with Chrysler, that was how it was sold to us here in America. Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler, lost their asses and their repution, built some Chrysler cars using old W210 suspension parts, and sold Chrysler at a garage-sale. Bad move that purchase.

The 124 is IMO the best-built and Engineered mid-size car ever, was my favorite as an Engineer and as an owner of many. The early are great cars, later ones better refined and appointed, no difference in quality. The chassis IIRC is 30% high-tensile steel, I don't believe that any other manufacturer has ever bothered to spend the money to create a car with the natural frequency of the W124, it was however benchmarked by every car manufacturer in the world.

Long live the Mercedes 124.

[zvone]

I am not on an old Canadian mechanic side at all,but it hapened before.Didnt it Ford suply engines for Italian De Tomaso model Pantera,Then BMW diesel engines in our Lincolns, GMs small SUV with Suzuki engines or Crysler with Mitsubishi engines etc,etc. Just for example. Then if those guys exchange engines,why it is not posible to do other things. Oh no, dont get me wrong,I love my Benzes dearly,but in the bussines world everything is posible.

[zvone]

I agree with Babymog with all but one thing.Mercedes never have had a Crysler. It was Daimler corporation who bought Crysler. And as we all know corporation makes all of those decisions.

Originally Posted by zvone

I am not on an old Canadian mechanic side at all,but it hapened before.Didnt it Ford suply engines for Italian De Tomaso model Pantera,Then BMW diesel engines in our Lincolns, GMs small SUV with Suzuki engines or Crysler with Mitsubishi engines etc,etc. Just for example. Then if those guys exchange engines,why it is not posible to do other things. Oh no, dont get me wrong,I love my Benzes dearly,but in the bussines world everything is posible.

Yes, all the manufacturer combinations you cited occurred. What does that have to do with any Chrysler connection with any 124 car? There are NO Chrysler components of any kind used in the W124 series Mercedes.


I agree that Chrysler was a TERRIBLE Daimler purchase. I thought so when it was announced and my thoughts have been confirmed by the garage sale.

[zvone]

no,no offence my friend,I DO NOT like that at all,not even a bit ,just taught.

[babymog]

Originally Posted by zvone

<>It was Daimler corporation who bought Crysler

True, corrected.

[83126]

He has it backwards. The Chrysler 300, Pacifica and Crossfire all have some MB architecture, design and powertrain components, not the other way around.

[lkchris]

Originally Posted by babymog

Marketing decided much more after this point.

Actually it was Lexus. Indirectly, of course.

No W212 diesels in the USA yet, but I can say without hesitation that there is NOTHING about the W124 that even comes close to the W211. The latter is a fantastically better car.

Have owned W123, W124 (2), W210, and W211.

I'm relatively certain most W124 owners would be blown away even by a W210 with the V6 and--especially--the five-speed transmission. Smoother in all ways than the iron-engined W124s and no headgasket leaks, either. Even our diesel is a rocketship compared to a dog 300E, and 2700 highway rpms (V6) or 2100 highway rpms (OM648) sure is nicer than 3400.

[ncc.1701]

Originally Posted by babymog

I agree with all above. As an Engineer, who worked on Mercedes projects with Mercedes' Engineers, my experience is a bit different.

The 124, 201, early 140s, and R129 were the last IMO of the Engineers' cars. Marketing decided much more after this point.

Mercedes-Benz never merged with Chrysler, that was how it was sold to us here in America. Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler, lost their asses and their repution, built some Chrysler cars using old W210 suspension parts, and sold Chrysler at a garage-sale. Bad move that purchase.

The 124 is IMO the best-built and Engineered mid-size car ever, was my favorite as an Engineer and as an owner of many. The early are great cars, later ones better refined and appointed, no difference in quality. The chassis IIRC is 30% high-tensile steel, I don't believe that any other manufacturer has ever bothered to spend the money to create a car with the natural frequency of the W124, it was however benchmarked by every car manufacturer in the world.

Long live the Mercedes 124.

Small correction, as of 2010 it is not marketing any more, it is Lawyers and Unions - see the Toyota issues.

Interesting part: all Toyota model under acceleration recalls are using accelerator by-wire and ARE affected by cell phones. The first mass-prod car with accelerator-by-wire is ... 1994-1995 W124.

IMHO the best reliability/engineered car ever is 1992 W124 with full 4sp auto and M103 engine, even if it is 2.6