1980 280 E

brite lite · 08-12-2008, 08:15 PM

HAVE HAD THIS CAR 2 MONTHS, AM GETTING 17 MPG, IS THAT GOOD, BAD?

DOES ANYONE HAVE AN OWNERS MANUAL TO SELL?

Untertürkheim · 08-12-2008, 10:43 PM

This depends on a number of factors, driving style, service history, etc. You should be able to get better than 17 on the highway though.

240D 3.0T · 08-13-2008, 04:04 AM

17mpg is good if you drive in the city, it should get around 20mpg on the highway.

doktor4carz · 09-03-2008, 03:50 AM

The manufacturer specifications teach us that this car with the M110 engine sucks 9 liters/100 km at 90 km/h and 11 liters/100km at 120... Convert this into MPG and that in your answer. This was the fuel consumption I obtained with my former 1979 280E automatic, after fixing the K-Jetronic system damages.

tanktube67 · 09-13-2008, 02:02 PM

thats a good MPG

Lurking thanks · 09-17-2008, 09:54 PM

I have a 1980 280e, it usually got ~24mpg on the freeway, it doesn't have factory air thou it's really stripped down + it needed a valve adjustment and tune up in a major way. The numbers in Doctor4carz's post work out to 26mpg @ 90km/h, that makes sense. Link

edit: also mine was the european model (probably purchased new in Sweden), it has the dual exhaust and higher compression supposed to make 180hp.

Untertürkheim · 09-18-2008, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lurking thanks

I have a 1980 280e, it usually got ~24mpg on the freeway, it doesn't have factory air thou it's really stripped down + it needed a valve adjustment and tune up in a major way. The numbers in Doctor4carz's post work out to 26mpg @ 90km/h, that makes sense. Link

edit: also mine was the european model (probably purchased new in Sweden), it has the dual exhaust and higher compression supposed to make 180hp.

One of the factors that made these use so much fuel was friction. Synthetic oils for that high RPM engine and even a regearing of the diff ratio should improve numbers drastically.

I believe these cars were fitted with a 3.46 final drive ratio. If you can get the 2.88 from a 1985 123 300 turbodiesel you should be in business.

240D 3.0T · 09-18-2008, 08:20 AM

Up to Oct77: 3.54
Nov77 on: 3.58

Untertürkheim · 09-18-2008, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 240D 3.0T

Up to Oct77: 3.54
Nov77 on: 3.58

I stand corrected.

BTW, just curious if you have thought about changing the gearing for better top-end / lower freeway rpm? Looks like you are running the 240 ratio there?

240D 3.0T · 09-18-2008, 09:13 AM

I already swapped the stock 3.69 for a 3.46.

Untertürkheim · 09-18-2008, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 240D 3.0T

I already swapped the stock 3.69 for a 3.46.

I thought the W/C123 617A ran a 3.07 until 85, when it became 2.88?

240D 3.0T · 09-19-2008, 06:32 AM

They did. The 3.46 is used in the non-turbo 300D models.

A 3.07 would make acceleration with a manual too slow and wear out the clutch quicker. A 3.3x or 3.2x ratio would be perfect for a 617a with a manual but they don't exist.

08-12-2008, 08:15 PM	#1
brite lite Newbie Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 2	1980 280 E HAVE HAD THIS CAR 2 MONTHS, AM GETTING 17 MPG, IS THAT GOOD, BAD? DOES ANYONE HAVE AN OWNERS MANUAL TO SELL?

09-03-2008, 03:50 AM	#4
doktor4carz Newbie Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bucharest, RO Posts: 5	The manufacturer specifications teach us that this car with the M110 engine sucks 9 liters/100 km at 90 km/h and 11 liters/100km at 120... Convert this into MPG and that in your answer. This was the fuel consumption I obtained with my former 1979 280E automatic, after fixing the K-Jetronic system damages. __________________ 1972 Mercedes W114 230 Automatic 1979 Mercedes W116 350SE 280S reloaded 1979 Mercedes W123 200D 1986 Mercedes W126 420SE 1978 Mercedes W123 250 230E reloaded 1973 Plymouth Valiant Sedan 1967 Ford Taunus 15M P6 1965 Ford Taunus 20M P5 Turnier 1987 Ford Fiesta 1.6D www.clubmercedes.ro

09-13-2008, 02:02 PM	#5
tanktube67 MBWorld Fanatic! Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: California Posts: 2,073	thats a good MPG __________________ 05 BMW 545i (sold) 04 G35 Coupe/lots of Mods (sold)

09-17-2008, 09:54 PM	#6
Lurking thanks Almost a Member! Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 34	I have a 1980 280e, it usually got ~24mpg on the freeway, it doesn't have factory air thou it's really stripped down + it needed a valve adjustment and tune up in a major way. The numbers in Doctor4carz's post work out to 26mpg @ 90km/h, that makes sense. Link edit: also mine was the european model (probably purchased new in Sweden), it has the dual exhaust and higher compression supposed to make 180hp. Last edited by Lurking thanks; 09-17-2008 at 09:59 PM.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

08-12-2008, 10:43 PM	#2
Untertürkheim MBWorld Fanatic! Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,206	This depends on a number of factors, driving style, service history, etc. You should be able to get better than 17 on the highway though.

08-13-2008, 04:04 AM	#3
240D 3.0T Banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Federal Heights, CO Posts: 507	17mpg is good if you drive in the city, it should get around 20mpg on the highway.

09-18-2008, 08:20 AM	#8
240D 3.0T Banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Federal Heights, CO Posts: 507	Up to Oct77: 3.54 Nov77 on: 3.58

09-18-2008, 09:13 AM	#10
240D 3.0T Banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Federal Heights, CO Posts: 507	I already swapped the stock 3.69 for a 3.46.

09-19-2008, 06:32 AM	#12
240D 3.0T Banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Federal Heights, CO Posts: 507	They did. The 3.46 is used in the non-turbo 300D models. A 3.07 would make acceleration with a manual too slow and wear out the clutch quicker. A 3.3x or 3.2x ratio would be perfect for a 617a with a manual but they don't exist.