Discussion
For five years or so I have run an R129 SL280 as an everyday car. It is a late i6 car from 1997 and is fitted with the 5sp box and panoramic roof. It has been an enjoyable steed often covering 10-12k of annual motoring without a hiccup. I was wasting away my evening perusing the net a couple of weeks ago and stumbled across a ’94 W124 320 coupe (or C124 to be precise) being sold just a few miles down the road. With no real need for a replacement/additional car, I ogled the photos for a few mins and then tried to forget about it. Eventually, curiosity got the better of me and I phoned to see if it was still for sale. Sadly it was, so off I drove to have a look. I knew as soon as I saw the car and opened the door (it still smelt fresh) that I was going to buy the car and surely enough a deal was struck a couple of days later.
Now the R129 is hardly a noisy car, but the W124 is serene in comparison. I find the ride softer, the sprung seats wonderfully comfortable and the added horses from the additional capacity more noticeable than I expected - the car flies at the merest twitch of the ankle whereas the 2.8ltr engine in the SL always needs a good shove. The SL has the all hydraulic gearbox compared to the E320 which has the lower four speeds operating hydraulically and the fifth speed engaging electrically. The later cars gearbox is a little smoother and the smaller engine is likewise a little creamier but the W124 is still entirely acceptable. I find the narrower car (W124) easier to pilot at speed and other than its less good radio reception a nicer car to own. The panoramic roof in the SL is wonderful (especially in the winter) but the coupe is equipped with a sunroof which is a happy sideways step. The SL is wonderfully screwed together but the E320 is on another level. I know it a purpose built coupe (unlike the SL which is a convertible with a hardtop fixed to it) but there is not a squeak or rattle from anywhere. For a 22 year old car with 88k on the clock I am simple astounded.
In the week since I took ownership I have accrued a couple of hundred trouble free miles in the coupe and now have an SL which for the first time in my custody feels outdone. I have always thought the SL an underrated car and the W124 perhaps a little overrated. I am inclined to think the general populace is completely justified in its adoration of the W124 - it is a truly outstanding piece of engineering which has stood the test of time both aesthetically and mechanically.
Now the R129 is hardly a noisy car, but the W124 is serene in comparison. I find the ride softer, the sprung seats wonderfully comfortable and the added horses from the additional capacity more noticeable than I expected - the car flies at the merest twitch of the ankle whereas the 2.8ltr engine in the SL always needs a good shove. The SL has the all hydraulic gearbox compared to the E320 which has the lower four speeds operating hydraulically and the fifth speed engaging electrically. The later cars gearbox is a little smoother and the smaller engine is likewise a little creamier but the W124 is still entirely acceptable. I find the narrower car (W124) easier to pilot at speed and other than its less good radio reception a nicer car to own. The panoramic roof in the SL is wonderful (especially in the winter) but the coupe is equipped with a sunroof which is a happy sideways step. The SL is wonderfully screwed together but the E320 is on another level. I know it a purpose built coupe (unlike the SL which is a convertible with a hardtop fixed to it) but there is not a squeak or rattle from anywhere. For a 22 year old car with 88k on the clock I am simple astounded.
In the week since I took ownership I have accrued a couple of hundred trouble free miles in the coupe and now have an SL which for the first time in my custody feels outdone. I have always thought the SL an underrated car and the W124 perhaps a little overrated. I am inclined to think the general populace is completely justified in its adoration of the W124 - it is a truly outstanding piece of engineering which has stood the test of time both aesthetically and mechanically.
Both lovely cars, but the R129 would always be the one I'd grab the keys for..
I looked at buying a 320 a couple of years ago as a daily driver, hesitated, then it was sold to another. I bought a BMW instead and even though I'm delighted with it, I'm often to be found scouring Autotrader looking at R129s. Their prices seem to have doubled since I was seriously looking.
I looked at buying a 320 a couple of years ago as a daily driver, hesitated, then it was sold to another. I bought a BMW instead and even though I'm delighted with it, I'm often to be found scouring Autotrader looking at R129s. Their prices seem to have doubled since I was seriously looking.
The OP makes an interesting comparison, although I would make the following observations.
The 280 M104 is a fine engine, and I've owned a couple in 124 form. It's sweet and refined, but underpowered. The 40 or so extra horses in the 320, or 300-24, make themselves known. I suspect most of us here would chose the keys to a 320 coupe over a 280 SL for driving pleasure.
The OP mentions the build quality difference between his cars, which wouldn't reflect my experience. Of the 124's I've had, the early 1991 pre-facelift was tangibly better than the post-facelift cars. My C124 was a bornite E220, the same age as the one above, and the quality wasn't a patch on the early car, or my 1990 SL.
Mention has been made of the rise in values. Both 124's and 129's seem to be scarcer than when I was looking for my car five years ago. It seems the days of the mint £5k 129 are now over. I truly hope they aren't priced out of the reach of aficionados, although increasing values allow justification for a comprehensive preventative maintenance programme.
The 280 M104 is a fine engine, and I've owned a couple in 124 form. It's sweet and refined, but underpowered. The 40 or so extra horses in the 320, or 300-24, make themselves known. I suspect most of us here would chose the keys to a 320 coupe over a 280 SL for driving pleasure.
The OP mentions the build quality difference between his cars, which wouldn't reflect my experience. Of the 124's I've had, the early 1991 pre-facelift was tangibly better than the post-facelift cars. My C124 was a bornite E220, the same age as the one above, and the quality wasn't a patch on the early car, or my 1990 SL.
Mention has been made of the rise in values. Both 124's and 129's seem to be scarcer than when I was looking for my car five years ago. It seems the days of the mint £5k 129 are now over. I truly hope they aren't priced out of the reach of aficionados, although increasing values allow justification for a comprehensive preventative maintenance programme.
Edited by mickyveloce on Tuesday 1st March 21:15
What a lovely looking E320 coupé: superb.
I own both, too, a 1999 SL500 and a 1993 E300 diesel T. Notwithstanding the vast difference in power between these two cars and even though the r129 was my first automotive love, I am afraid I also prefer the 124. I find the steering and suspension better resolved in the 124; I prefer the more upright and higher driving position of the 124; the narrower bodywork makes the car much easier to place; the 124 is significantly lighter than the 129; and I think the 124 is probably quieter and slightly more rigid in its body than the 129. That said, there is no doubt in my mind that the 129 has even better build quality than the 124; and the performance of the SL500 and the manner in which it performs are intoxicating and much missed in my 124.
Sadly, decent examples of both cars are really declining in numbers now. The manufacturer's support for these models is beginning to fall back, too. It's a real shame because to my mind these are the best cars of their type ever produced. They have almost all of the features (especially safety features—only the absence of ESP in the 124 chassis is really felt) of the motor car as a matured invention and yet have build quality, character and authenticity that are entirely absent from today's new cars.
I own both, too, a 1999 SL500 and a 1993 E300 diesel T. Notwithstanding the vast difference in power between these two cars and even though the r129 was my first automotive love, I am afraid I also prefer the 124. I find the steering and suspension better resolved in the 124; I prefer the more upright and higher driving position of the 124; the narrower bodywork makes the car much easier to place; the 124 is significantly lighter than the 129; and I think the 124 is probably quieter and slightly more rigid in its body than the 129. That said, there is no doubt in my mind that the 129 has even better build quality than the 124; and the performance of the SL500 and the manner in which it performs are intoxicating and much missed in my 124.
Sadly, decent examples of both cars are really declining in numbers now. The manufacturer's support for these models is beginning to fall back, too. It's a real shame because to my mind these are the best cars of their type ever produced. They have almost all of the features (especially safety features—only the absence of ESP in the 124 chassis is really felt) of the motor car as a matured invention and yet have build quality, character and authenticity that are entirely absent from today's new cars.
I've an R129 320 (love it) and like roof down motoring, I've often wondered about a 124 cabrio? How do they compare?
I'm not a really quick driver but like a nice solid, refined feel. I'm often doing motorway stuff but not exclusively. I find the 320 with 5 speed box adequate so wouldn't really want to lose that. When I was trying cars I looked @ an SL300 24v with a 4 speed box, a bit disappointed with the box, didn't seem as smooth or keen to change, but maybe it was just not a good one.
Sometimes the extra rear seat space of the 124 would be useful, I considered one when I bought the 129 but dismissed it as.
a) Not as stylish.
b) No hardtop, the car lives outside and used all year.
c) I like the seats and low driving position of the 129
I'm not a really quick driver but like a nice solid, refined feel. I'm often doing motorway stuff but not exclusively. I find the 320 with 5 speed box adequate so wouldn't really want to lose that. When I was trying cars I looked @ an SL300 24v with a 4 speed box, a bit disappointed with the box, didn't seem as smooth or keen to change, but maybe it was just not a good one.
Sometimes the extra rear seat space of the 124 would be useful, I considered one when I bought the 129 but dismissed it as.
a) Not as stylish.
b) No hardtop, the car lives outside and used all year.
c) I like the seats and low driving position of the 129
I think having one of each is the only way forward; there are enough differences to warrant both.
I was very tempted by the White E320 at www.w124.co.uk, but it's at the other end of the country from me. I've enough experience of the cars to want a 300-24 or 320 if I bought another, as opposed to the 280. Or a diesel. I'd love a go in one.
The A124 cab is a car I've never driven. It looks great and whilst I would have thought it would be less rigid than the purpose-built convertible 129, I'm sure contemporary road tests acknowledged it's ability as a comfy cruiser.
I was very tempted by the White E320 at www.w124.co.uk, but it's at the other end of the country from me. I've enough experience of the cars to want a 300-24 or 320 if I bought another, as opposed to the 280. Or a diesel. I'd love a go in one.
The A124 cab is a car I've never driven. It looks great and whilst I would have thought it would be less rigid than the purpose-built convertible 129, I'm sure contemporary road tests acknowledged it's ability as a comfy cruiser.
mickyveloce said:
Or a diesel. I'd love a go in one.
Serious offer: next time you're in Newcastle (I seem to recall you're based in North Yorkshire), let me know and I'll buy the coffees and you can have a go of my diesel.mickyveloce said:
The A124 cab is a car I've never driven. It looks great and whilst I would have thought it would be less rigid than the purpose-built convertible 129, I'm sure contemporary road tests acknowledged it's ability as a comfy cruiser.
I've never driven the A124, either, but I've always been faintly obsessed with them. My impression is that the quality is another leap forward. They were astonishingly expensive in period. I love all that stuff about the little damping weights in odd places. And I love the almost aristocratic style they possess. They're proper, grown-up motor cars. And four-seat Merc convertibles are always sure-fire winners long term. I think they're under-valued and if I had £15k spare I'd definitely buy one.r129sl said:
mickyveloce said:
Or a diesel. I'd love a go in one.
Serious offer: next time you're in Newcastle (I seem to recall you're based in North Yorkshire), let me know and I'll buy the coffees and you can have a go of my diesel.mickyveloce said:
The A124 cab is a car I've never driven. It looks great and whilst I would have thought it would be less rigid than the purpose-built convertible 129, I'm sure contemporary road tests acknowledged it's ability as a comfy cruiser.
I've never driven the A124, either, but I've always been faintly obsessed with them. My impression is that the quality is another leap forward. They were astonishingly expensive in period. I love all that stuff about the little damping weights in odd places. And I love the almost aristocratic style they possess. They're proper, grown-up motor cars. And four-seat Merc convertibles are always sure-fire winners long term. I think they're under-valued and if I had £15k spare I'd definitely buy one.
r129sl said:
mickyveloce said:
Or a diesel. I'd love a go in one.
Serious offer: next time you're in Newcastle (I seem to recall you're based in North Yorkshire), let me know and I'll buy the coffees and you can have a go of my diesel.mickyveloce said:
The A124 cab is a car I've never driven. It looks great and whilst I would have thought it would be less rigid than the purpose-built convertible 129, I'm sure contemporary road tests acknowledged it's ability as a comfy cruiser.
I've never driven the A124, either, but I've always been faintly obsessed with them. My impression is that the quality is another leap forward. They were astonishingly expensive in period. I love all that stuff about the little damping weights in odd places. And I love the almost aristocratic style they possess. They're proper, grown-up motor cars. And four-seat Merc convertibles are always sure-fire winners long term. I think they're under-valued and if I had £15k spare I'd definitely buy one.A year on (actually precisely - 12 months ago today I collected the SL) the A124 is safe here as its charm, competence, engaging nature and understated style stand in contrast to the harder edged SL - the latter is not a sports car by any means, but it is a sufficiently different driving experience to mean there is a great deal of difference (without any value judgement) between the two cars which the casual observer could regard as too similar to justify sharing a garage.
ETA: both cars have 5 speed gearboxes, but the 722.6 in the SL is a leap forward. We're quite a tall family, and frankly the A124 rear seats are 5% more useful than the useless rear seats in the SL!
Edited by Stegel on Wednesday 2nd March 21:16
r129sl said:
mickyveloce said:
Or a diesel. I'd love a go in one.
Serious offer: next time you're in Newcastle (I seem to recall you're based in North Yorkshire), let me know and I'll buy the coffees and you can have a go of my diesel.mickyveloce said:
The A124 cab is a car I've never driven. It looks great and whilst I would have thought it would be less rigid than the purpose-built convertible 129, I'm sure contemporary road tests acknowledged it's ability as a comfy cruiser.
I've never driven the A124, either, but I've always been faintly obsessed with them. My impression is that the quality is another leap forward. They were astonishingly expensive in period. I love all that stuff about the little damping weights in odd places. And I love the almost aristocratic style they possess. They're proper, grown-up motor cars. And four-seat Merc convertibles are always sure-fire winners long term. I think they're under-valued and if I had £15k spare I'd definitely buy one.A year on (actually precisely - 12 months ago today I collected the SL) the A124 is safe here as its charm, competence, engaging nature and understated style stand in contrast to the harder edged SL - the latter is not a sports car by any means, but it is a sufficiently different driving experience to mean there is a great deal of difference (without any value judgement) between the two cars which the casual observer could regard as too similar to justify sharing a garage.
ETA: both cars have 5 speed gearboxes, but the 722.6 in the SL is a leap forward. We're quite a tall family, and frankly the A124 rear seats are 5% more useful than the useless rear seats in the SL!
Edited by Stegel on Wednesday 2nd March 21:22
Thanks to all those who have replied to my post so far - it has been really interesting to hear what other Mercedes enthusiasts think of the various models and variants.
Like others on here I bought the SL because it fitted lots of my needs on paper - in my case a straight six engine, automatic gearbox, fantastic build quality, good reliability and all year round usability. What I have come to realise is that I rarely take the roof off - it’s a job for two strong people (the pan roof is heavier than the solid alloy variant) and makes the car rather noisy at motorway speeds with the unlined canvas roof in place. I also have to confess at this point that I own a rather lovely 1995 AC Ace (see current C&SC) which fulfils my fair weather motoring requirements nicely. As such, I use the car as a two seater coupe (the rear seats are all but useless with the hardtop in place). It’s low, sleek, reasonably fast and fairly inconspicuous if I turn up to a meeting to see some clients. I thought about an SLK or later SL so I wouldn’t have to lug the hardtop about but these newer models just don’t appeal to me in the same way to be as the mid 90s classics. The A124 never appealed much to me - I think mostly because an old boss had one and he was bit of a tw*t.
It is interesting to hear what others think of the 2.8 vs 3.2ltr debate. The added ummph from the extra horses of the larger powerplant is addictive, added to which the W124 seems to be returning better fuel consumption figures. I thought this might be due to the lower weight of the coupe over the SL but online figures seem to show a great disparity of weights (can anyone confirm genuine mass for both?) which makes me wonder if there is not a great deal of difference between the models. I am totally torn as to what to do with the SL now; as various parties have noted the prices of R129s have crept up meaning they are now being looked after properly - I for one have circa £2k per annum of bills for running mine and it is always hard parting with a car that has had so much time/love/expense thrown at it.
Like others on here I bought the SL because it fitted lots of my needs on paper - in my case a straight six engine, automatic gearbox, fantastic build quality, good reliability and all year round usability. What I have come to realise is that I rarely take the roof off - it’s a job for two strong people (the pan roof is heavier than the solid alloy variant) and makes the car rather noisy at motorway speeds with the unlined canvas roof in place. I also have to confess at this point that I own a rather lovely 1995 AC Ace (see current C&SC) which fulfils my fair weather motoring requirements nicely. As such, I use the car as a two seater coupe (the rear seats are all but useless with the hardtop in place). It’s low, sleek, reasonably fast and fairly inconspicuous if I turn up to a meeting to see some clients. I thought about an SLK or later SL so I wouldn’t have to lug the hardtop about but these newer models just don’t appeal to me in the same way to be as the mid 90s classics. The A124 never appealed much to me - I think mostly because an old boss had one and he was bit of a tw*t.
It is interesting to hear what others think of the 2.8 vs 3.2ltr debate. The added ummph from the extra horses of the larger powerplant is addictive, added to which the W124 seems to be returning better fuel consumption figures. I thought this might be due to the lower weight of the coupe over the SL but online figures seem to show a great disparity of weights (can anyone confirm genuine mass for both?) which makes me wonder if there is not a great deal of difference between the models. I am totally torn as to what to do with the SL now; as various parties have noted the prices of R129s have crept up meaning they are now being looked after properly - I for one have circa £2k per annum of bills for running mine and it is always hard parting with a car that has had so much time/love/expense thrown at it.
As in so many things, it depends on how much money is worth to you but I'd keep the SL. It isn't costing you a fortune to run and it is not as if the cash you'd realise on sale would make much of a difference. You're right about the weight of the panoramic top. If you have a garage, I would recommend a well-anchored lifting mechanism for it.
The 1997 brochure (a lovely document, worth paying £20 for on Ebay) lists a SL280 as having a kerb weight of 1,760kg (the optional panoramic top will take this up a bit more). I don't have a 1995 brochure for the E320 coupé but the 1993 brochure for the mechanically identical 320 CE states that the kerb weight is 1,490kg. A big difference.
Edit: a bit of googling suggests the panoramic top weighs 42kg against the regular top's 33kg.
The 1997 brochure (a lovely document, worth paying £20 for on Ebay) lists a SL280 as having a kerb weight of 1,760kg (the optional panoramic top will take this up a bit more). I don't have a 1995 brochure for the E320 coupé but the 1993 brochure for the mechanically identical 320 CE states that the kerb weight is 1,490kg. A big difference.
Edit: a bit of googling suggests the panoramic top weighs 42kg against the regular top's 33kg.
Edited by r129sl on Wednesday 2nd March 21:57
I'm in a similar position. I have an A124 320, and then bought a 500SL with the intention of keeping it. In fact, I sold the SL and still have the 124.
They are different from each other - although not as markedly as I was expecting to be honest - and both have their strengths, but I find the 124 more of a complete package somehow, feeling less compromised all round.
Both are wonderful cars, and it's a nice choice to have to make.
ETA - Your C124 looks a peach.
They are different from each other - although not as markedly as I was expecting to be honest - and both have their strengths, but I find the 124 more of a complete package somehow, feeling less compromised all round.
Both are wonderful cars, and it's a nice choice to have to make.
ETA - Your C124 looks a peach.
Edited by CharlesdeGaulle on Wednesday 2nd March 22:08
Slightly OT, a few have mentioned the SL soft top being unlined. Mine's a 97 car with a lining sort of hanging from the canvas, do they not all come with this?
The panoramic roof is seriously heavy and makes a noticeable difference to the way the car drives but feels luxurious. After a week spent in a modern E class the R129 feels lovely, potent, comfy and surprisingly small.
The panoramic roof is seriously heavy and makes a noticeable difference to the way the car drives but feels luxurious. After a week spent in a modern E class the R129 feels lovely, potent, comfy and surprisingly small.
truck71 said:
Slightly OT, a few have mentioned the SL soft top being unlined. Mine's a 97 car with a lining sort of hanging from the canvas, do they not all come with this?
The panoramic roof is seriously heavy and makes a noticeable difference to the way the car drives but feels luxurious. After a week spent in a modern E class the R129 feels lovely, potent, comfy and surprisingly small.
My SL hood is the same inside - the lining appears an afterthought, and does nothing to add to the hood's performance, unlike the multi-layered A124 hood. The panoramic roof is seriously heavy and makes a noticeable difference to the way the car drives but feels luxurious. After a week spent in a modern E class the R129 feels lovely, potent, comfy and surprisingly small.
I find the hardtop ungainly rather than heavy, and worry about scratching the car when refitting. I bought a lovely hoist shortly after getting the car - I must fit it in the garage as it's not helping while in the shed!
The construction of the hoods does seem to be a bit shoddy, considering the list price when new. Albeit mine doesn't leak, and only a little noisier than the hard top at speed.
I think a lot of problems/noise/leaks/windows not sealing is down to poor fitting, not many of these cars will have the original hood.
I wondered if anyone had any experience of this sort of thing?
http://www.cabrioservicememelink.nl/mercedes-sl-r1...
I like the idea of losing the side windows, is anyone in the UK fitting these.
I think a lot of problems/noise/leaks/windows not sealing is down to poor fitting, not many of these cars will have the original hood.
I wondered if anyone had any experience of this sort of thing?
http://www.cabrioservicememelink.nl/mercedes-sl-r1...
I like the idea of losing the side windows, is anyone in the UK fitting these.
PositronicRay said:
The construction of the hoods does seem to be a bit shoddy, considering the list price when new. Albeit mine doesn't leak, and only a little noisier than the hard top at speed.
I think a lot of problems/noise/leaks/windows not sealing is down to poor fitting, not many of these cars will have the original hood.
I wondered if anyone had any experience of this sort of thing?
http://www.cabrioservicememelink.nl/mercedes-sl-r1...
I like the idea of losing the side windows, is anyone in the UK fitting these.
Now that is interesting. Do you have any more information or independent reviews? I like the look, as well, even if it is non-factory.I think a lot of problems/noise/leaks/windows not sealing is down to poor fitting, not many of these cars will have the original hood.
I wondered if anyone had any experience of this sort of thing?
http://www.cabrioservicememelink.nl/mercedes-sl-r1...
I like the idea of losing the side windows, is anyone in the UK fitting these.
The "roadster top" was not intended to perform like a proper cabriolet top: after all, the car was supplied with the hardtop. It is almost as if you're meant to drive the car either under the hardtop or with roof down: only under the soft top if you must. But we live in Britain.
r129sl said:
PositronicRay said:
The construction of the hoods does seem to be a bit shoddy, considering the list price when new. Albeit mine doesn't leak, and only a little noisier than the hard top at speed.
I think a lot of problems/noise/leaks/windows not sealing is down to poor fitting, not many of these cars will have the original hood.
I wondered if anyone had any experience of this sort of thing?
http://www.cabrioservicememelink.nl/mercedes-sl-r1...
I like the idea of losing the side windows, is anyone in the UK fitting these.
Now that is interesting. Do you have any more information or independent reviews? I like the look, as well, even if it is non-factory.I think a lot of problems/noise/leaks/windows not sealing is down to poor fitting, not many of these cars will have the original hood.
I wondered if anyone had any experience of this sort of thing?
http://www.cabrioservicememelink.nl/mercedes-sl-r1...
I like the idea of losing the side windows, is anyone in the UK fitting these.
The "roadster top" was not intended to perform like a proper cabriolet top: after all, the car was supplied with the hardtop. It is almost as if you're meant to drive the car either under the hardtop or with roof down: only under the soft top if you must. But we live in Britain.
A few years ago while car hunting, I saw an SL with a similar hood advertised. It was out of area and not quite what I wanted, so I didn't get to physically see it.
Defiantly a market for an improved hood and lining. Maybe it's just too difficult to incorporate it with the original frame.
I know things have moved on in 20yrs but the latest soft tops on Audi A5/A3's are superb. Just like driving with a hard top.
Gassing Station | Mercedes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff