Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
300E modded, ML500
Joined
·
352 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi,

I was wondering if your veterans can give me some advice on the best years to buy a w124 ??


Which years are the best years in terms of its aethestic appearance and performance ??

And ,

Do you think the acceleration of 300e is adequate or its better to get the 400e ?


As a potential new customer which things should I look out for that needed to be fix/changed on this model ?


Thanks a bunch !
 

·
Registered
W124.036 / W210.074
Joined
·
248 Posts
Hi!

Well, to complain the 300E and the 400E is not a good example, because, the 400E(205KW) is V8 and the 300E(132KW) is Straight 6. if you want Power , than you go with the 400E. But if you look out for an "economical" car than you better go for the 300E.
And if you`re searching for the Ultimate Power in W124, than you have to choose the 500E!

But that is only my opinon, i thnk some of the other guys would say ,maybe something different!


And to your Question, which Year, mhm i think 1993 Models are best choice, because, they are through this time well developed since 9 years and have not "Bugs" [:D], thought.
 

·
BenzWorld W124 Host
1993 300E 3.2L 24V
Joined
·
1,088 Posts
Though many don't like the M104 engine in the later 300Es and E320s, I prefer it, it offeres up almost 220hp and almost 230lb/ft of torque. Put your foot down and it'll really get up and move, it's not a drag light racer, but it'll pull more on the highway than you would imagine. Plus you'll get excellent mileage out of it. The 400E owners will argue that the V8 is the way to go, but commuting several dozen miles everyday, I find the 1993 300E with it's 104.992 engine, when you take care of the headgasket and the engine wiring harness, it'll be nice in return to you.

-Tubs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
W124 best years are 94 and 95...the final years of its production. Aesthetically, W124 looks better and nicer with the facelift since 94.

Just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
95 E300D
Joined
·
154 Posts
I would agree that like most cars the later years are the best 94-96 although the W124 changed very little in appearance the engines developed quite a bit. Having owned M104 and M606 powered models I would tend to avoid the M104 (6 pot multivalve) unless you have documentary evidence that the head gasket and wiring loom have been replaced then its fine.

If you live in the US where gas is cheaper than water then go straight to the V8 (400E or 500E)which in addition to being more fun is also (as i am told) very reliable.

Keith
 

·
Registered
1994 E320
Joined
·
1,730 Posts
Hello everyone

Not that I disagree with what you guys said, but I've tried a couple of later model 124s with the M104, and found that I prefered the M103's "smoothness" and higher low-end pull. My car has perfectly adequate power for my needs, and I've actually managed to smoke many later cars with significantly more powerful engines (what with leaving a BMW 740 in my dust, and don't even get me started on Nissan Maxima raceboys!)
I'd love to get an 400E or even a 500E, but for my extensive everyday driving, it simply doesn't make sense.
To the original poster, I have this to say (and this is strictly my personal opinion, and I can be wrong): I practical terms, there really isn't a "modelyear significance" to the 124. A clean, well-kept 1986 124 will be just as trouble-free as a good 1995 124. When I hunted down and bought my car, it didn't even occur to me to ask what model year it is until later in finalizing the deal. All I cared about was it's condition, and when I found that the car was clean, I grabbed it! My car is 18 years old, but it had only 72,000 km on the clock when I got it, and judging by the condition of the car, I think it's authentic (now it has 105,000 km and runs even better than the day I bought it).
However, if you want the satisfaction of later technology and improved safety measures like airbags traction control and programmable transmission, that's another story. Personally, I prefer the 1980s (relative) simplicity.
Good luck.

Shady
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,227 Posts
The M103 300E's are the best but you'd be hard pressed to find one on sale that doesn't need work because if it DIDN'T need work the owner would never get rid of it LOL.

The 94-95 e320 is an awesome vehicle as long as all the annoying crap like wiring harness has been taking care off. Its also semi-ODBC compliant. Engine parts are more expensive I think. Electronic parts also more expensive. Safety is a cut above.
 

·
Registered
1994 MB E320
Joined
·
197 Posts
Definitely '94-'95.
 

·
Registered
E500, C43 AMG, E280
Joined
·
328 Posts
Yes take the 94-95 W124. They are more refined and MB have fixed the bugs and problems of the ealier cars (If they had any). My E280 (2.8L) is late a 1995 model and it's slightly different to the 80's and early 90's W124's. Cosmetically the bootlid and the hood are very slightly different and more options where offered in the 94-95 cars. The bumpers are colour coded and the bottom cladding of the car is shiny like the paintwork.

Something like the laser central locking...etc is included (as option) in the later models & driver with passenger SRS airbags. I think burlwood was also offered as an option to all W124 later cars (94-95) although the E500/500E got it standard in its production years (91-94).

The E500/500E (5.0L) is the most powerful of the W124's as standard (AMG offered an E60 Later on) and the E 200 (2.0L) being the least powerful but all W124's are great cars and they will all live on to be great cars for a very very long time.

If anything here is incorrect, please let me know, I wish to stand corrected for any mistakes made.

Hope this helps.

Mo
 

·
Registered
1992 300E
Joined
·
35 Posts
Guys,
I just wanted to mentioned that the I6 engine became a DOHC in '93 (4 door models) on the E300. My parents owned a '92 and it is a SOHC engine. The DOHC motor is 40 bhp and I believe is 34 Ft/Lbs stronger. Please somebody correct me if I am wrong, hope it helps.
 

·
Registered
W124.036 / W210.074
Joined
·
248 Posts
The 300E is a 12V, and in pre`90 there came up a 300E 24V and in `92 the 300E gets 280E which is also a 24V.

is this is correct!?
 

·
BenzWorld W124 Host
1993 300E 3.2L 24V
Joined
·
1,088 Posts
The M104 engine was incoporated into all models in 1993, except for the 4-matic W124s which retained the M103 engine.

-Tubs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Yes the best W 124's are the later model ones 94-95. I have a 200E which is the most mellow of them all but it still pulls and runs beautifully, these cars are so so very reliable providing you service them and look after them well. So in short go for a later model one and whatever engine capacity you want....
 

·
Registered
W124
Joined
·
5,423 Posts
Its a matter of what you prefer. If its "looks" then I can understand why people like the facelift. To me, the later cars are challenging because of the complexity built into them in the later years. My preference would be an early car because they were so simple in comparison to the older cars.
 

·
Registered
1987 300TD
Joined
·
17 Posts
Granted this is an old thread, but what the hay
I would also agree with my own personal observations that selecting the "best" w124 is a mixed bag and highly subjective. The later cars, particularly the engines are more refined and powerful. Pre or Post Facelift stylistically is up to the buyer.
I have found that there was a cheapening of the cars over the years consistent with the facelift. While many design specs remained the same, there is a perceived and IMO real degradation of certain parts and manufacturing processes undoubtedly to reduce production costs. Remember, this was a loss leader car for Mercedes when it first debued, costing more to build than they could list the car. One way to offset this as the years went on was to save on engineering (making few design changes over the model's life) and reducing build costs via trimming processes and reducing parts quality/cost.

Most post facelift w124 have less corrosion protection than the earlier cars. This is my opinion, from what i have seen. Not sure if it is purely a steel quality issue or foregoing the galvanization process that the earlier cars received, but what I have noticed in my own ownership experience as well as what I've seen with friends and those cars in the wrecking yards is that the earlier car bodies hold up against rust much better than the later cars. In my own ownership experience with a total of 2 older and 2 post facelift w124s is that I replaced more parts on the newer cars than the older ones. Simple things like headlight switches on my 87 and former 88CE functioned without a flaw, click, click nice and heavy and firm. Both later cars with less than 1/3 the mileage required changing the headlight switches and even the new replacements are very plasticy and are no where as reassuring in their tactile feel as the older ones.

So it goes to say that each has its merrits, the best marriage IMO would be a super clean older bodied car with a post facelift engine and get the best of both. As a long term keeper, driver, I think the older cars will physically last longer.
 

·
Registered
1997 s320, 1994 E320 Cab, 1989 300ce (parting out soon)
Joined
·
525 Posts
I've owned a half dozen. 94,95 because of the smoother engine
 

·
Registered
1995 E320
Joined
·
2,606 Posts
Granted this is an old thread, but what the hay
I would also agree with my own personal observations that selecting the "best" w124 is a mixed bag and highly subjective. The later cars, particularly the engines are more refined and powerful. Pre or Post Facelift stylistically is up to the buyer.
I have found that there was a cheapening of the cars over the years consistent with the facelift. While many design specs remained the same, there is a perceived and IMO real degradation of certain parts and manufacturing processes undoubtedly to reduce production costs. Remember, this was a loss leader car for Mercedes when it first debued, costing more to build than they could list the car. One way to offset this as the years went on was to save on engineering (making few design changes over the model's life) and reducing build costs via trimming processes and reducing parts quality/cost.

Most post facelift w124 have less corrosion protection than the earlier cars. This is my opinion, from what i have seen. Not sure if it is purely a steel quality issue or foregoing the galvanization process that the earlier cars received, but what I have noticed in my own ownership experience as well as what I've seen with friends and those cars in the wrecking yards is that the earlier car bodies hold up against rust much better than the later cars. In my own ownership experience with a total of 2 older and 2 post facelift w124s is that I replaced more parts on the newer cars than the older ones. Simple things like headlight switches on my 87 and former 88CE functioned without a flaw, click, click nice and heavy and firm. Both later cars with less than 1/3 the mileage required changing the headlight switches and even the new replacements are very plasticy and are no where as reassuring in their tactile feel as the older ones.

So it goes to say that each has its merrits, the best marriage IMO would be a super clean older bodied car with a post facelift engine and get the best of both. As a long term keeper, driver, I think the older cars will physically last longer.
Bullshit.
 

·
Registered
91 500SL 37k,90 300SE sold, 91 300E sold , 92 300E137k ,02 Kia Sedona ,I know..... its a Mini van.
Joined
·
8,324 Posts
Condition,condition,condition,that what really matters in theses cars early or late, cosmetics & mechanical's,straight 6 or V8,so many beaters out there!
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top