I have always loved older Mercedes diesels, and now with the economy and gas prices (i drive at least 20,000 miles a year) putting a squeeze on me as well as many others, I am thinking I have another reason perhaps to finally own one. Right now I drive a 1995 Audi S6, an incredibly fun, fast car, but fuel costs and repair bills are becoming a burden with the costs of everything going up exponentially it seems. I am looking at a 1987 Mercedes 190D 2.5 and am wondering what your thoughts are on this model. My grandfather has owned one since new and it has never given him any major problems. Aside from the fuel economy - he says he averages 38mpg with mostly highway driving - how low is the true cost to own one of these? I've heard older mercedes diesels are bulletproof and quite simple to repair and perform regular mantinance on. Would a 190D be a good choice for efficient, reliable diesel transportation? I've also heard the W123 chassis is quite durable and easy to maintain, with the 240D being neigh indestructible (although slow, which is a worry here as they don't make freeway on ramps very long in Portland!)

So what are everyone's thoughts about the true costs of ownership when it comes to eather a 190D or a 240D? I am fairly mechanically inclined and feel comfortable doing a fair amount of work myself, especially given these cars dont have the complex electronic systems of my Audi. Economics aside though, there is still something incredibly endearing about 80s mercedes diesels that would still make me want one, even if it meant a little more work in the long run.

Your resident starving college student

- Jordan

 

Let me start by saying - skip the 240D, 0-60 times are over 30 seconds But the car IS the most reliable car on the face of the planet.

38mpg for a 2.5 190D is a bit high. I had the more economical 4cylinder 2.2 version and with proper maintenance/air pressure (while driving at a constant 60mph) only saw 36 mpg maximum. An extra cylinder isn't going to help mpg out much unless he's using a stick shift.

Maintenance on these cars is very simple >>with the right tools. Everything is easily accessable under the hood. If you treat them right they are indestructable. Body integrity is amazing, you won't have to worry about practically anything failing to do its job.

I can't say what the 'true' cost of owning one really is because I was scammed with an overheated car. The engine blew a tappet valve and died less than 20k miles later from 77k when I got it to 93k milesat death. The cost of putting a used engine in it was about $3,500 with labor/costs including the engine.

Before you set your eyes on one I would highly suggest reading over the maintenance records, make sure the shifting is perfectandcheck the car for overheating while parked and highway speeds. I'm not sure if the 2.5 uses one, but the 2.2 190D uses a magnetic fan clutch to power the fan that cools the engine. It's prone to fail, leaving the engine at risk for overheating. The electric powered fans don't have the issue. If the car's an automatic, you can save yourself a lot of hassle to make sure there's no clunk sound coming from the rear end under the car. Problems with that could range from a bad vacuum pump, cracked and leaking vacuum line(s), flex disk(s), center bearing, tranny modulator, K1 spring, etc. It's basically guesswork when they clunk and a lot of 190 owners see this issue.

Overall the 190d'sare remarkable. They're very fun to drive and they would probably fall into 3rd as the most reliable car on the planet other than the 240D at first and 300SDL in sedond.

 

Thanks for the quick reply! Glad to hear that the 190D is so reliable, a 300SDL would be fantastic although its a bit thirsty (comparatively anyway) and probably too much car for me size wise. The 240D would be a great car, but probably a little scary since they don't leave you much room to merge, so the 190 will probably be the way i go, but I'll still try and test drive a few 240s just to see if the power is manageable as they are incredibly durable and also have character that few cars, that are still viable as daily drivers, do. What sort of fuel consumption should i expect from a 240D thats in good shape? I've heard its lower than the 190 because of the added size and weight, as well as an older engine design and very short gearing. But all and all maybe the cheaper running costs would offset the millage disadvantage compared with the 190. Although this may be a moot point if after my test drive i find it too terrifying... Which i probably will.

38mpg is a bit high for the 190D 2.5 from what i've heard. Although my grandfather does do most of his driving on 45mph two lane roads with few stops, and tends to drive for maximum efficiency (he's the only octogenarian hypermiler I'm aware of!) So that may explain the efficiency. Thankfully i seem to have inhareted that tendnacy, and exceed EPA ratings if i'm not in too much of a hurry.

I'll definitely take a look around at what's available in my neck of the woods, it looks like there are a few well-maintained 240Ds on craigslist, despite many of them having covered over 300k, not many 190Ds though. However it seems that with the newfound focus on WVO and biodiesel conversions, the demand, and as a result the prices prices, of these cars have gone up significantly in the past few months.

- Jordan

 

Don't worry, i wasn't planning on it. I was just mentioning how the WVO fad has driven prices up quite a bit. Although it has also had the effect of reducing the number of diesels for sale that havn't been run on WVO... and im leery, to say the least, of buying one of those.

 

The MPG sounds about right to me. I used to have a 1992 300D with the 2.5 turbo and I normally got 33-36 MPG out of it. I would also get about 45 in the city as these engines use almost no fuel at idle

I also did most of my driving on long interstate streaches at about 70 mpg.

You might call an independent shop and ask them what they get for a valve job. These cars really do need one at about 200,000 miles. The power steering pumps on these are also weak points, but they are easy and cheap to rebuild.

Sam

 

Whats the problem with WVO?! Thats the only reason Im gonna get one. So what if it blows up 10-20K miles down the road, its still cheaper then fueling and maining my Audi. Even if I had to buy a new car every year! =)

 

Also i think these incredible cars deserve better. Much better. Especially since they are getting increasingly rare, i bet the WVO fad is going to send a lot of these cars to an early demise at the scrap heap. It pains me to think about it...

 

Whats the probelm with WVO? Ive heard its cleaner than diesel, its cheaper than diesel, and it makes the engine run better too.