1980s Mercedes Diesels - 656,320 Miles & Going, & Going

[JimMayor007]

If you''re looking for a reliable, long-lasting, relatively cheap car, it''s hard to beat an old Mercedes diesel. The diesels from the early 1980s, including the 300SD, 300D, 240D, 300TD, and 300CD are relatively inexpensive to purchase, and they are still reliable cars after all these years.

After driving 300SDs, 300SDLs, and a 240D for many years, I have become a die-hard fan, and wouldn''t dream of owning anything else! I have a 1984 300SD with 656,320 original miles (1,056,245 km), with the original engine. After purchasing this car, I traced the title back, and found that I was the third owner. Once the title search was done, I contacted the previous two owners.

I asked about the engine, and it was confirmed that the previous owners had never done any major engine work, and that the engine in it is the one that came in it! Never had an overhaul or any major work done! Unreal!! My wife''s 1983 240D has 366,200 miles (589,342 km), and my step-daughter''s 1982 300SD has 237,200 miles (381,737 km). All three of our cars are driven regularly. These cars will last for years with regular service and maintenance! We took our second 1300-mile round-trip in the 240D to visit the in-laws a few months back, and once again, it never missed a lick the whole trip! How many other 25 year old cars would you trust to drive 650 miles each way from home and back, with that many miles on it!?

...read the full guide with pics here

[lkchris]

Might also mention that these cars are extremely poor performing, extremely fuelish, extremely polluting, and, in 2008, about as antisocial as any car can be. They're exactly the sort of cars various local governments propose to buy to just get them off the road.

[Untertürkheim]

Originally Posted by lkchris

Might also mention that these cars are extremely poor performing, extremely fuelish, extremely polluting, and, in 2008, about as antisocial as any car can be. They're exactly the sort of cars various local governments propose to buy to just get them off the road.

That's complete BS. I suggest you check the EPA documents regarding emissions on the OM617A. It is actually on par with gasoline engines of the time.

They are great cars, and do not let anyone tell you otherwise!

[240D 3.0T]

Extremely fuelish? Bullshish. They get better MPG than most cars 10 years younger and still get better than many NEW cars! Look at a 2009 VW Rabbit, 21/29mpg. I get 25/34mpg.

Who gives a rats @ss if they are "antisocial"? Why would anyone want to appeal to an egotistic prick like you?

The "extremely polluting" thing here is you. Its people like you that would have good cars destroyed and make people buy new, resource consuming, emissions choked, inefficient, expensive, unreliable, wasteful and poorly designed plastic junkboxes.

[Untertürkheim]

Originally Posted by lkchris

Might also mention that these cars are extremely poor performing, extremely fuelish, extremely polluting, and, in 2008, about as antisocial as any car can be. They're exactly the sort of cars various local governments propose to buy to just get them off the road.

And I hope you plan to lead be example, I am sure you have GL and E bluetecs on order to replace your horribly polluting CDIs.

[EdzBenz]

Originally Posted by lkchris

Might also mention that these cars are extremely poor performing, extremely fuelish, extremely polluting, and, in 2008, about as antisocial as any car can be. They're exactly the sort of cars various local governments propose to buy to just get them off the road.

Kent, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one.

I used to get anywhere between 40-45 miles per gallon with my 84' 190D. Power wasn't very high, but I was never nervous about merging in Chicagoland expressway traffic. My car never leaked oil, or burned it at 175K. The new Bluetecs (although I do think they are very cool) are what have people fooled into thinking they are actually better for the environment. The fact that there's a ton of emissions controls on there means that it takes that many more resources, production, and energy to make those emission add ons. A properly tuned diesel engine, like my old 190, has to be one of the most most efficient running (from a pollution and mpg standpoint) engine made.

[harkgar]

Originally Posted by JimMayor007

If you''re looking for a reliable, long-lasting, relatively cheap car, it''s hard to beat an old Mercedes diesel. The diesels from the early 1980s, including the 300SD, 300D, 240D, 300TD, and 300CD are relatively inexpensive to purchase, and they are still reliable cars after all these years.

After driving 300SDs, 300SDLs, and a 240D for many years, I have become a die-hard fan, and wouldn''t dream of owning anything else! I have a 1984 300SD with 656,320 original miles (1,056,245 km), with the original engine. After purchasing this car, I traced the title back, and found that I was the third owner. Once the title search was done, I contacted the previous two owners.

I asked about the engine, and it was confirmed that the previous owners had never done any major engine work, and that the engine in it is the one that came in it! Never had an overhaul or any major work done! Unreal!! My wife''s 1983 240D has 366,200 miles (589,342 km), and my step-daughter''s 1982 300SD has 237,200 miles (381,737 km). All three of our cars are driven regularly. These cars will last for years with regular service and maintenance! We took our second 1300-mile round-trip in the 240D to visit the in-laws a few months back, and once again, it never missed a lick the whole trip! How many other 25 year old cars would you trust to drive 650 miles each way from home and back, with that many miles on it!?

...read the full guide with pics here

Without mentioning the very favorable insurance premium for such cars. My sold 560 SEL (w126) was cheaper to insure than many late model Japanese econo-boxes. I still maintain that the E320 CDi is the best of both old and new world diesels. It has most of the latest technology (high pressure common rail injection) and power without all the useless tree-hugging measures mandated from MY 2007, particularly the urea injection.

[240D 3.0T]

Originally Posted by harkgar

without all the useless tree-hugging measures mandated from MY 2007, particularly the urea injection.

None of their vehicles have that yet. It won't happen until MY09/10.

[harkgar]

Originally Posted by 240D 3.0T

None of their vehicles have that yet. It won't happen until MY09/10.

You are right.

I am waiting with interest the coming Acura TSX turbo diesel with a 2.2 liter engine. It will meet all 50 States' emission regulations and does not require urea injection. Mileage is supposed to be wonderful.

I wonder why MB does not do something similar in its C series. With the light body and a small 4 cylinder turbo diesel it will sell well in this high price oil environment.

[Gamesterx]

Originally Posted by lkchris

Might also mention that these cars are extremely poor performing, extremely fuelish, extremely polluting, and, in 2008, about as antisocial as any car can be. They're exactly the sort of cars various local governments propose to buy to just get them off the road.

Kent Christensen, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[harkgar]

Post some photos for all to see