Trade honda for diesel Benz?

October 18, 2009 9:57 AM

Thinking about trading my 97 Accord for 1980 diesel benz.

My car: 1997 Honda Accord, 160k miles, stick shift, good condition. Blue book probably ~2000.

His car: 1980 diesel benz 300 sd turbo diesel. good + condition. No AC. Needs back seat replaced. Asking 1500 or trade.

I am interested in diesels and possibly bio/veggie conversion. Primarily this would be a safety issue as well. I have two little kids and if the Benz is significantly safer this would be a strong rationale.

posted by toastchee to travel & transportation (14 comments total)

Wow, forgot to mention my car needs new CV joints and new rotors.
posted by toastchee at 9:59 AM on October 18

Well, the Benz certainly isn't going to have airbags.

What's the mileage on it? Anecdotally, I've been cruising craigslist for old diesel Mercedes of late, and while they're reputed to be solid workhorses that'll run forever, I don't believe I've actually seen any with over 300K on the odometer. Of course, there are a lot of broken odometers out there, too.
posted by mumkin at 10:08 AM on October 18

225k
posted by toastchee at 10:13 AM on October 18

No car from 1980 is going to safer than a car from 1997, sorry. I also doubt that the Benz won't require significant amounts of work if he only wants $1500 for it. If you want the Benz because it's cooler than your Accord, that may be true but it's in no way more practical, don't fool yourself. How much do you like working on cars or how much do feel like spending to keep the benz running? That's really what you should be asking yourself.
posted by doctor_negative at 10:14 AM on October 18

Of course this is just hearsay but there is a fellow where I work who owns one of those cars. Not sure on the year, but he lives in northern PA and drives all around NY and MA as part of his job, and has well over 300k miles on the car. I've never once heard him mention any car problems. Although he did tell me that all those Benzes have lifetime roadside assistance--no matter how many miles or owners, call the number in the trunk and they'll come help you.

If you're good at fixing stuff and you can get the rear seat replaced without any problems, I'd say go for it.
posted by Jinkeez at 10:27 AM on October 18

I have an 84 300SD. I run it on veggie and conventional diesel, whatever's handy. In this warm climate (South Carolina), I haven't had a need to do any extra fuel-heating or two-tank systems. I just added a bigger in-line fuel filter before the manual primer pump and I haven't had any problems running any blend of WVO or conventional diesel. So, if you're into VWO diesel, you're on the right track with a Benz.

I'd keep the Accord, however. It's easier and cheaper to fix. Parts are cheaper, in general, and when things like the door locks stop working, it's easier to diagnose and repair. The Benz has lots of vacuum operated accessories and they're a bigger pain to fix than something simple and electric.

Only buy that Benz if everything works. Door locks, windows, lights, wipers, gauges, no huge oil leaks, no bad clunks or clatters from the suspension.

On the other hand, if you're really mechanically inclined and have a flexible financial situation, or your best friend fixes cars, go ahead and get the Benz.
If you're not up to putting new axles and rotors on the Accord (financially or mechanically), the Benz might not be for you.

In fact, the ONLY reason that I bought an old Mercedes is because I'm a professional mechanic, with more tools than I can move by myself, and access to technical resources and the experience of my peers and colleagues. And there's still stuff on my Benz that I haven't bothered fixing.
posted by Jon-o at 10:29 AM on October 18 [2 favorites]

I would avoid the SD and go for a mid-eighties 300D Turbo. It has exactly the same engine and drive train as the SD with a slightly smaller, more nimble body. Be careful who you buy it from, and note how it has been maintained. I have a 1984 model, and it has been a low-maintenance dream. Google Groups has a good bunch of Mercedes buffs with lots of info, and you can do simple maintenance tasks yourself. The Honda might still be safer, though, because of newer technology.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 11:19 AM on October 18

I'd say the Accord is probably safer by every measure except one--the Benz is heavier. But the Accord probably has better brakes, almost certainly steers quicker and absolutely has better safety equipment (admittedly, if it was a late-'90s Benz, that wouldn't be true).

Like Jon-o says, the Benz is a good choice for biofuel zealots (e.g., people whose other car is a cargo bike) and people who like working on cars. If you just want a safe and reliable vehicle for your family, keep the Accord.
posted by box at 12:34 PM on October 18

Coming from somebody who just finished trading in his 1985 benz in August for Cash for Clunkers.... Keep the accord. Although, Jinkeez is right about the life-time roadside assistance. No matter how many miles, owners, or anything. Call them, and you get roadside assistance. Now, of course anything beyond a few gallons of gas or a jump or tire change isn't going to be free. But, it's still nice.
But, as much as I loved my Benz, I had to get rid of it. It was just costing me too much to maintain and repair. I found a great guy that does repair work on Mercedes only, and he could always find me refurbished parts to try to keep my cost low, but it was still very expensive.
And, as nice as the Benz is, and whatever features it come with, you have to remember one thing: It still has been in use for 17 more years than your Accord. That's a huge difference. If it were a newer model Benz..then maybe.
posted by ComeUndone at 4:16 PM on October 18

Primarily this would be a safety issue as well. I have two little kids

Keep the newer car. Don't get the Benz. There is no way to justify the Benz while you have two young kids on a safety level.

The trading for bio conversion is an admirable concept, but you have real life responsibilities and they don't seem compatible with your desires at present.
posted by Brockles at 6:07 PM on October 18

Seconding Jon-o above. On the con side of this trade: your Accord is probably good for many more trouble-free miles than the Benz, it's cheaper to maintain, safer, and more reliable.
posted by zippy at 11:19 PM on October 18

pretty much every answer is a 'best answer'. thanks so much, all!
posted by toastchee at 3:35 AM on October 19

I had (still have, in fact) a 1974 220D. What everyone else has told you is right on target: you'll be spending a lot of time or money working on it. Some things that went wrong with mine I never anticipated, and wasn't prepared to fix myself, despite being fairly handy (a hydraulic clutch?!?).
Also, unless you live in a warm climate or have a warm garage, you would to well to remember how cold-blooded old diesels can be. In Michigan, there were several 72-hour periods during January/February when I didn't turn off the engine, knowing that, even with the block heater, it wouldn't start again until the cold snap was over. You can imagine that this goes a long way to negating any fuel efficiency/ecological benefits, though a well-designed biodiesel/two-tank system might help.
posted by pullayup at 9:25 AM on October 19

In Michigan, there were several 72-hour periods during January/February when I didn't turn off the engine, knowing that, even with the block heater, it wouldn't start again until the cold snap was over.

You either had a faulty glow plug system (poor current supply?) or a dodgy block heater if it plain wouldn't start. It doesn't get THAT cold in Michigan. I very much doubt this is typical behaviour, and I'd be pretty sure that a fuel heater would have fixed this regardless (possibly for not much cost). Leaving a space heater under your fuel tank may have cured this (assuming that was practical).

That doesn't change the conclusion to stay away from the Merc, mind you.
posted by Brockles at 2:21 PM on October 19