Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
1984 MERCEDES-BENZ 300 TURBO DIESEL, 1978 CHEVROLET K20 CUSTOM DELUXE
Joined
·
365 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Imagine a 200d 54hp and 83 ftlb.
 

·
Registered
'86 W123 200, OM617 non-turbo, bastard 5-speed; '95 W202 C250 Diesel, OM605 non-turbo, 5-spd man
Joined
·
4,275 Posts
No need to imagine, just ask Army.

Then again, I think the 220D (of which there were a very few) was even slower - same power, more mass.
 

·
Registered
1984 MERCEDES-BENZ 300 TURBO DIESEL, 1978 CHEVROLET K20 CUSTOM DELUXE
Joined
·
365 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
before i bought my car i took it for a test drive and the right rear caliper seized, he offered to pay for a new one which was nice. 80 for a remanufactured ate caliper.
 

·
Registered
1981 W123 300D non turbo, 1992 190E 1.8 <=> 2.0
Joined
·
6,561 Posts
No need to imagine, just ask Army.

Then again, I think the 220D (of which there were a very few) was even slower - same power, more mass.
Why me?

I think you're getting me confused with a chap who also lives in Holland but who has now moved to the dark side...

...VW!


Although my W123 is probably one of the slowest - it hasn't moved for years!
 

·
Registered
'86 W123 200, OM617 non-turbo, bastard 5-speed; '95 W202 C250 Diesel, OM605 non-turbo, 5-spd man
Joined
·
4,275 Posts
Why me?

I think you're getting me confused with a chap who also lives in Holland but who has now moved to the dark side...

...VW!


Although my W123 is probably one of the slowest - it hasn't moved for years!
Oops. Sorry.:eek:

(Only remembered the Dutch bit...)
 

·
Registered
2001 Volvo V40
Joined
·
2,954 Posts
The early 200D had 55 DIN HP and 113 Nm torque, after february 1979 it was 60 DIN HP with the same torque. To increase the power output MB uped the maximum rpm of the engine and changed valves, prechambers and pistons a bit, but the 60 HP doesn't "feel" differently from a 55 HP 200D.

The 220D had 60 DIN HP but with a higher 126 Nm torque, so that car feels a bit nippier.

The 200D might be slow, but it isn't that much slower than a N/A 300D automatic for instance. I found the 200D perfectly driveable, even in today's traffic. Although it must be considered that in Europe all trucks have speed limiters, limiting their speed to 55 mph, so you don't have to worry about a big truck tailgating you.

Here is my 0 to 60 mph in my no longer owned 200D:

 

·
Outstanding Contributor
600 (3.200 mm)
Joined
·
1,542 Posts
Factory data. 0 - 100 km/h.

200 D
Manual:
31 s - 55 h.p.
27.4 s - 60 h.p.
Automatic:
33.2 s - 55 h.p.
29.4 s - 60 h.p.

220 D
Manual:
28.1 s
Automatic:
29.1 s

:)
 

·
Registered
Brown 83 300SD I have a few other projects before I get to her!
Joined
·
1,845 Posts
Oops. Sorry.:eek:

(Only remembered the Dutch bit...)
A little off topic here but PC you but a 5Sp in yours, any pix of the underside? Did you have to cut the driveshaft?

A five speed any faster than an Auto 300D?

Thanks,
Dave
 

·
Registered
'86 W123 200, OM617 non-turbo, bastard 5-speed; '95 W202 C250 Diesel, OM605 non-turbo, 5-spd man
Joined
·
4,275 Posts
I'll take pics of the underside if you like. I'll be draining the oil in the tranny on Sunday (0-1000 km run-in in 1 week flat:D). What would you like to see?

Yes, I didn't have to cut the driveshaft, but decided it would be cheaper than finding and swopping out. So I cut it.

I haven't really done acceleration runs in Donkey, that's not how I roll. But I can tell you that Donkey is noticably qiucker than a factory-spec 300D thanks to her shorter final drive (3.69, from the 240D), and quieter thanks to the overdrive.

Maybe I should get my car in a magazine, maybe with a factory-spec 300D auto, for a comparitive test:D
 

·
Registered
1981 W123 300D non turbo, 1992 190E 1.8 <=> 2.0
Joined
·
6,561 Posts
A comparative test with an auto? Oh come on why bother?
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top