mid 1990's 220CE vs 320CE===INFO AND ADVICE PLEASE

[carspath]

how do you see the reliability and running costs of a 220ce compared to a320ce?

are there any specific issues and weak points that i should look out for with each of these models

thanks in advance

[r129sl]

There's little in the running costs. On the 320, you need to check that the wiring harness and head gasket have been replaced. But if it is running correctly and dry at this age, chances are they have been done. In an ideal world you'd find a car that has had the rear suspension refurbished at some time in the last 5 years or 50k.

[chazola]

Nick (Bolide's) guide will tell you what you need to know, http://w124.co.uk/info.html personally I would go for the 6-cyl as this is a great engine if the issues have been sorted (as r129 says- head gasket and wiring loom), the trade off with the 320 is slightly worse mpg of course but the engine has great torque and is super smooth.

[mccrackenj]

Just to jump in (sorry) - how would you rate the 280 & 320 engines compared to the earlier 300 for smoothness, mpg, general drivability? (I know the 280 isn't available in the coupe but I'm thinking estates.)

Also - to help the OP - isn't there some issue re cost of replacing wishbone bushes in a 320 Vs 220? I seem to remember reading it in an earlier thread. Or is it only i.r.o. 'Sportline' cars?

[chazola]

I've had cars with the 300 (m103 12v) and 280/320 (m104 24v) engines, and there's a definite improvement in torque with the 24v engines, though they're a little coarser noise-wise imo than the 12v. The 12v needs to be wound-up before it really comes alive but pulls really nicely. The fuel economy is rubbish though, definitely more manageable on the 24 valves, but then they often have the head gasket/timing cover leaks and wiring harness issues.

[mccrackenj]

Thanks for that.

I'm pretty impressed with the 12v 3.0 so far, I like the smoothness but as you say you do need to wind it up a bit, then it does pull surprisingly well. It must have felt like a pretty quick big lump 23 years ago.

Fuel consumption isn't important as the car will only do maybe 2k a year max (a lot less if I get a coupe to go with it) but I wonder if I'd be happy to trade-off a small bit of extra noise/coarsness for better torque? If so, better mpg would be a nice, if unimportant, bonus.

Plenty of time to think about it, not in any hurry yet. I've some cosmetic things I want to do to the 300TE, plus a good mechanical going-over, but if a good 280/320 estate turned up locally in then next 12-18 months I'd have to think about it - especially if it was in a 1993 car with the proper grille etc. Chances of that are very, very slim though.

[r129sl]

The 3.0l 12v is a great engine, extremely smooth, smoother than the 24v, and very robust. It reminds me somewhat of the small 12v BMW 6cylinders of the late-80s (eg in the E30 325i): buttery smooth but a bit gutless (although I'm mulling on a 260 E, so they can't be that gutless). The differences in fuel consumption are marginal. They're all 20-26mpg. The 24v is more torquey and, above 4,500rpm, has a wonderful, traditional DOHC rasp. I'd still buy on condition and not on any particular spec.

[chazola]

probably the best 124 I've driven was a 320TE Bolide had for sale a few years back, a '93 half-facelift car in Nautic Blue with Sportline suspension and lovely grey leather. It went like a rocket and handled really well. Sadly didn't have the cash to buy it at the time. I love my diesel and the economy it gives, but if that car came up again for sale I'd be massively tempted.

Edited by chazola on Thursday 19th January 17:04

[mccrackenj]

r129sl said:

The 3.0l 12v is a great engine, extremely smooth, smoother than the 24v, and very robust. It reminds me somewhat of the small 12v BMW 6cylinders of the late-80s (eg in the E30 325i): buttery smooth but a bit gutless (although I'm mulling on a 260 E, so they can't be that gutless). The differences in fuel consumption are marginal. They're all 20-26mpg. The 24v is more torquey and, above 4,500rpm, has a wonderful, traditional DOHC rasp. I'd still buy on condition and not on any particular spec.

Ha, funny you should say it's like an E30 325i - as that's my other car! I haven't driven it for several weeks but I got into it at the weekend just to give it a run 'round the block' and the first thought that struck me on driving it again was how damn smooth it is!

On the other hand, a "traditional DOHC rasp" is a nice sound too; and somehow appropriate for a big expensive (in its day) estate. All smooth and refined most of the time but a slightly gruff rasp and plenty of go when pushed. Used to love the sound of the XK in my old XJ6 series III many years ago.

I agree of course that condition & history is more important than exact spec, but if we're to aspire to a particular 'ideal' W124 then we need to decide what that particular car is first. Happy bimbling about in the 300 for now though. Must get the 200 sold . . .

Anyway, I've hogged enough of the OP's thread.

Thanks


(PS: any progress on repairing yours?)

[r129sl]

I'm in funds to carry out the repairs. New wings and tailgate going on at the same time and various bits of rust to be removed. I'm going to have sound proofing put in the doors (I have a stack of Dynamat Extreme in the garage) after Bolide's favourable comments on this.

Ideal spec for me: 1993 320 E/TE/CE (i.e. not a facelift) with four speed automatic transmission, non-sportline chassis, heated seats, air con, and zebrano wood. Lecky seats are nice, too. Obviously smoke silver is my preference but Beryl Blue Metallic over Mushroom leather looks great, especially on an estate car. Alternatively a very early 300 E (grey bumpers, no Sacco panels) with no options at all apart from maybe 15 hole alloys: I really like the simple, plain, early cars, they have a real sense of integrity about them, hence my interest in a low miles 1987 260 E near me.

Edited by r129sl on Thursday 19th January 21:29

[mccrackenj]

I concur - pre-facelift with with the 280/320 engine and standard suspension would be the ideal for me. I like Smoke Silver too, but I think silver needs black leather rather than mushroom personally. NOT grey though, never been a fan of grey leather in any car.

My 300 sounds like your preferred alternative; 1989, no Sacco panels, no wood trim on doors or across the dash, grey bunpers, not even alloys (though I'm going to fit 8 holes) in Almandine.

Hope you get yours back on the road soon. I'm sure it'll be lovely with the extra work you're doing at the same time.

[bolide]

I am pretty happy with all the colour combinations but remember this car well. The (one) owner had it from new and had had kids in it. Quite how she managed to keep it looking this good is beyond me

This is Ruby Red with Mushroom leather











Nick Froome

[mccrackenj]

wibble!

[carspath]

thank-you for all these replies---much appreciated

may i ask the reasons for why the pre-face lift cars are preferred by some ---is this purely aesthetics, or were there mechanical differences as well?

[r129sl]

carspath said:

may i ask the reasons for why the pre-face lift cars are preferred by some ---is this purely aesthetics, or were there mechanical differences as well?

It's a matter of taste alone. The pre-facelift cars look more traditional. Plus, that was the way they were designed to look. The facelift is just that: a facelift. Time always proves the original to be a better and more cohesive design than the facelift: the R129 and W140s are very good examples of this.

Bolide: do you have any high specification diesels coming soon? I'm having second thoughts about repairing my TE.

[chris333]

r129sl said:

carspath said:

may i ask the reasons for why the pre-face lift cars are preferred by some ---is this purely aesthetics, or were there mechanical differences as well?

It's a matter of taste alone. The pre-facelift cars look more traditional. Plus, that was the way they were designed to look. The facelift is just that: a facelift. Time always proves the original to be a better and more cohesive design than the facelift: the R129 and W140s are very good examples of this.

Bolide: do you have any high specification diesels coming soon? I'm having second thoughts about repairing my TE.

R129: Ironside has a 1996 E300 estate. Looks nice, but no leather, 180k miles. I've no idea about their value but at £6950 it seems (not surprisingly) to be pretty stiffly priced...

[r129sl]

Seen it. Thinking about it. Stiffly priced, indeed, at that mileage but the spec is amazing.

Here's my thinking: my w124 has 196k miles, needs a new tailgate, two new wings, a new bumper, gentle straightening on a jig, a new windscreen aperture (because at some time somebody didn't replace the screen properly), new inner wings at the rear and a full repaint. I figure I might as well buy a new one. Boo hoo.

[chris333]

r129sl said:

Seen it. Thinking about it. Stiffly priced, indeed, at that mileage but the spec is amazing.

Here's my thinking: my w124 has 196k miles, needs a new tailgate, two new wings, a new bumper, gentle straightening on a jig, a new windscreen aperture (because at some time somebody didn't replace the screen properly), new inner wings at the rear and a full repaint. I figure I might as well buy a new one. Boo hoo.

That is quite a long list to sort out. on yours

I'm not too far away from them if you need someone to go and have an initial look at it (never driven a 124 though, so can't add too much expert knowledge!)

[bolide]

Decent Diesels are proving really difficult to find now. There are plenty on eBay but they are all the wrong side of 200k and, without exception, unloved, under-maintained and worthless

It's a shame because a good E300 Diesel is such a nice thing to drive. Not quick but very smooth

Nick Froome