I have had a 1970 and 1988 sedans both with a gas engine.. I'm thinking
of trying a diesel engine now, since gas is so high. How did the
mercedes cars fare with a diesel?? any pros/cons to consider? I would be
looking at late models, not brand new ones. Thanks for any advice...
Y.D., Warren, Michigan
Even though my experience with MB diesels is limited - '76 300D - the
best answer that you can find is to go back through this group's
discussions many months and see what other folks have had to say. The
5 cylinder diesel engines are a legend unto themselves.
The really big question is: Do you like diesels? If you understand
and like the fact that they are a really different animal than the gas
engines that you have become accustomed to. Find a diesel car (or
small truck) and test drive it. Once you test drive, the differences
Good luck with your quest!!
Current MB CDI diesels are totally different from those in the past. You
have to go and test a modern diesel, not any truck. You might conclude that
it drives better than a gasser at the same price category.
Mercedes was and is a leader in diesel engines.
Whether you like the fuel is another matter. Even in traditionally
'anti-diesel' Britain sales of diesel cars are still rising. In some
European countries they are the majority.
Factors such as relative fuel prices, car and road taxation and fashion all
play a role.
For direct replies replace nospam with schmetterling
"Anonymous" < firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
and, don't forget...with a diesel, you can pull into your local mcdonalds'
and fill up on vegetable fat...then away you go, leaving the fabled scent of
seriously, many diesel owners are switching to a vegfat fuel...
I'm no expert, but a google should reveal loads of info
05 c240 awd
Actually, it is much more complicated than that. Mcdonalds will not
give away their fryer grease. Large chains have contracts with grease
renderers. You need to find the little guys like barbecue places or
chinese restaurants with owners that are receptive to your desire to
take their grease. simply taking it out of a grease dumpster is theft
since the greases renderer owns that dumpster, and they want that
grease since they can process it and sell it to pet food companies or
Once you get the grease you need to dewater it(harder than it seems)
and filter it down to 5 microns. It is a labor intensive process that
is far more complicated than driving up to Mcdonalds and filling up.
If it were really that easy, everyone would be doing it.
Plus vegetable oil is a better solvent than #2 diesel. A buddy of mine
in Atlanta has a neighbor that gives him filtered waste oil. He began
using it and went through - literally - 20 fuel filters in 100 miles
as they clogged up with crap the oil cleaned out of the (admittedly 25 year old)
Need Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org
Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org
I have an 84 300D, and it runs well. I have over 190K miles(the
odometer goes out in these more often than not... literally...
seriously.) It still has good compression. As stated earlier, the
performance gets better if the car is newer. Through the years they
steadily got more and more powerful. The old 240Ds from the 70's were
horribly underpowered. I think they are dangerous to drive they are so
slow. But you will find people that love them since they were
available with a manual. The 300D had one more cylinder, and from
81-85 had a turbo. That turbo makes a difference. It makes a slow car
less slow, but still not fast. An owner of one of the mercedes that I
test drove summed it up nicely when he said,"The turbo makes it
acceptable. You will hear the turbo kick in... you won't feel it
though." It's about as fast as a mid nineties japanese econobox. I'd
guess 0-60 around 11 seconds or so on a good day. The late eighties
diesels had aluminum heads, which had problems. Through the nineties
it was hit and miss. I think Tiger covered the good and bad years
there. The newest CDI models are great. My friends father just got one
a few months back. They are very refined. Quiet, powerful, quick, and
very very clean burning. You really wouldn't know it was a diesel
unless you were looking for it.
Good luck in your quest.
Having a corvette and a 560SEL along with the 240D has taught me how
to drive it properly. I don't consider it dangerous or unsafe. and I
don't think MB did either. Look at the production numbers. One must
have the ability to adapt to a different driving style. I actually
enjoy the hell out the 240D and drive it the most. I've seen the
prices rising upwards for the older MB diesels around these parts.
I believe you. However, in the three that I have driven I have never
felt it. I'm assuming that yours is tuned properly, or even for a
little more performance, whereas all three that I have driven were
tired. I need to do some more research on the ALDA and adjust my
timing, valve lash, and run lubro-moly through. Anything else I need
Just your opinion. Only 'dangerous' if YOU drive dangerously. In the early
eighties I had a W123 200D with only 72 PS. Perfectly fine, since it cost
me relatively little to run (taxed as company car).
Mind you, I drove mostly around flat northern Germany. Colleagues from
mountainous Bavaria were less pleased with the car's power, but I don't
recall anyone complaining about danger.
For direct replies replace nospam with schmetterling
-- < email@example.com> wrote in message
LOL... I remembered I quipped Juergen about the HP figure... He talked about
how he went from like 72PS to like 110PS and I was like whoa... what a
whopping 50% increase in power... must be fast...
He quipped back like you are just jealous that you don't have a diesel...
I just bought (3 months ago) an 84 300D (5 cyl. turbo-diesel), with
260,000 miles on it. It runs strong still. I just changed the oil on
it at 262,500 (since I didn't know when it was last changed), and I
was fairly pleased with the experience. It was actually slightly
cheaper to change the 2 gallons of oil in this car than it was for an
oil change in my 2000 Jetta, and actually much less messy than the
Jetta (until I dropped the drain plug in the old oil).
My engine is rated at 170 hp and 170 ft-lbs of torque. It doesn't feel
like it when you start off, but it will set you back in the seat when
it shifts under hard acceleration. The turbo definitely helps with
that I'm sure. The biggest issue for me in switching to a diesel is
being more picky where I fuel up. Not that I am picky, its just there
aren't as many choices. Thankfully, I go by two truck stops on my way
to work each day, so no problem there, but otherwise I have to be on
the lookout for a diesel pump.
My recommendation is go for the diesel. (You'll save a boat load on
spark plugs too!)
I live in Maryland, where there is all sorts of terrain. My house is
at 355 feet elevation, but a river one mile from my house is at 220
feet. There are 14% and 18% grade hills on my daily drive. Also, since
I live near two large cities there are some very busy stretches of
road where I need to be able to merge either while going uphill, or
where there is practically no merge lane. The 300D does fine with this
even though it is not fast. However, I've been told that the 240D had
63 horses. When I think about the fact that that is about half of what
my car has, and my car doesn't weigh even nearly twice as much, I
can't imagine driving that car without winding up being that idiot
that has to stop in the merge lane simply because I can't get up to
speed in time. And once I had stopped, that would just make things
worse. If I lived in a flatter less aggressively driven locale, I
could probably live with the 240D's acceleration. For me though, I'd
consider it a liability. I may just have a higher threshold for what I
consider dangerous. I've heard the same argument from a guy I know
that has owned an 87 300D with the 6 cylinder, a 240D, and an early
eighties 300D. He called them fast, dangerously underpowered, and
delightful respectfully. Although I will admit that my impression of
them may be biased by my exposure to this fellow.
You've forgotten one thing re 240D and 300D... although the latter has more
horses, it's typically "Automatic", OTOH the 240D came typically as a 4 speed
manual.... I've driven both and the 240 is much better at accelerating... I
guess there is the possibility that the 300D I drove was crap.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.