www.tdiclub.com

Economy - Longevity - Performance
The #1 Source of TDI Information on the Web!
Forums Articles Links Meets
Orders TDI Club Cards TDIFest 2014 Gone, but not forgotten VAG-Com List Unit Conversions TDIClub Chat Thank You



Go Back   TDIClub Forums > TDI Model Specific Discussions Areas > Non VW Group Diesels

Non VW Group Diesels This section is for discusion of Non VWGroup Diesels.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 14th, 2000, 15:23   #1
Bob Norris
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Default Performance (?!) 240D vs. 1.6 VW diesels

I have a friend who's long-cherished '84 diesel rabbit will soon be too small to haul his family around in (family of 4 including 2 rapidly growing sons). His wife also drives a diesel Rabbit. He's a diesel fanatic and I'm thinking of recommending that he shop around for a 240D, as they seem to be still fairly common around our area (Seattle). Has anyone here owned or driven both? How do they compare as daily drivers? I'm hoping some Mercedes owners can help.

Thanks, Bob Norris
Bob Norris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2000, 22:58   #2
BKmetz
Administrator
 
BKmetz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1997
Location: Illinois
Fuel Economy: 45 MPG
Default Re: Performance (?!) 240D vs. 1.6 VW diesels


The MB W123 makes an excellent daily driver.
MB sold over 5 million W123s world wide during its production run from 1977 to 1985. A few were imported in 1986 as station wagons only.

MB 240Ds were imported from 1977 to 1983. In 1984 the new and smaller W201 body 190D replaced the 240D as the bottom diesel model. A mint condition 83 240D under 100,000 miles should sell for no more than $5,000. Typical prices are $1,000 to $3,000, depending on mileage and condition.

The 240D will be as fast/slow as a non-turbo VW 1.6 engine. Mileage will be around 30 MPG give or take a few either way, depending on the state of tune. The difference will be that a 240D is a large well made car compared to any VW, especially considering the age. A W123 weighs in at 3,500 lbs. and has about the same interior space as a Passat.

The W123 body is mechanically straight forward to work on. The cars are simply over engineered and built and are not complicated. Parts are easy to get and reasonable, even from MB. I can get parts for my MB cheaper than my VW. If you have the skills/tools to work on a VW, then you can work on an old MB.

Tell your friend not to pass up any good 300Ds or 300D-Ts (T for turbos). That extra HP really comes in handy and mileage is only slightly lower. The 300D non-turbo was imported from 1977 to 1981. All 300Ds from 1982 to 1985 are turbocharged. 300Ds/D-Ts sell anywhere from $1,500 to 10,000. Low mileage coupes and wagons are on the high side. Typical prices for 300Ds runs from $2,000 to $6,000.

All the MB diesel engines used in the 240D/300D models are almost unbreakable. The only way to kill one is to neglect the oil and/or timing chain. The timing chain and tensioner should be replaced by 150,000 miles. Replacing the timing chain is easier and cheaper than replacing the timing belt on a VW TDI engine.

Besides oil & filter changes, the only routine maintenance item is having the valves adjusted every 15,000 miles. A new valve cover gasket is installed with every valve adjustment. MB makes an excellent auto-tranny. If the tranny fluid & filter was changed every 50,000 miles, the trannies last forever.

As with any car over 15 years old, things wear out. HVAC problems can be expensive to fix. The rubber around the glass, body and suspension bushings will be cracked and dry rotted. Vacuum leaks are common, which effects EVERYTHING. These items are usually just tedious to find and fix, not impossible. Most MB owners keep good records of all repairs and routine maintenace.

A good place to get introduced to MBs is at www.mbz.org/. From there you can get links to just about anything MB.

Brian, 97 Passat TDI, 85 MB 300D-T
BKmetz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2000, 07:50   #3
Peter Cheuk
Gasser :P
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Daly City, Calif., USA
Default Re: Performance (?!) 240D vs. 1.6 VW diesels

Those older MB diesels are great. My uncle bought a brown 240D sometime in my youth (mid to late seventies) and I remember riding around in that car. After getting my license, I got to drive it once. This was years ago (mid eighties). I remember that I was stepping on the throttle and the car wouldn't accelerate so I stomped on it. The transmission downshifted into first and the car charged off. It turns out the 240D has a long travel throttle and it starts off in second. Really neat, I thought, but slow. Slow compared to the 240Z I was driving at the time.

If he offered to sell me that car I would buy it without even consulting my wife, risking a divorce. But, alas, my cousins are lining up to get that car when he finally gives it up (which I don't think will be any time soon).
Peter Cheuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2000, 13:24   #4
Bob Norris
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Default Re: Performance (?!) 240D vs. 1.6 VW diesels

Brian- I greatly appreciate your detailed and informative reply! Thanks, too, Peter, for your view on the 240D.

[This message has been edited by Bob Norris (edited November 21, 2000).]
Bob Norris is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright - TDIClub Online LTD - 2014
Contact Us | Privacy Statement | Forum Rules | Disclaimer
TDIClub Online Ltd (TDIClub.com) is not affiliated with the VWoA or VWAG and is supported by contributions from viewers like you.
1996 - 2013, All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.12527 seconds with 9 queries
[Output: 59.35 Kb. compressed to 53.03 Kb. by saving 6.32 Kb. (10.65%)]