95 E300 3.0 6 cyl Diesel, reliable or not? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Biglex · #1 08-27-2006, 02:07 PM

Anyone have this motor? Lookin to buy one and need advice.

Thanks

Matt L · #2 08-27-2006, 03:06 PM

Non-turbo OM606? It's a great engine. I really like it in my 210.

jshadows · #3 08-27-2006, 03:14 PM

brother has one. got it with 110K miles on it..put on 10K and it's been ultra reliable. His wife loves it too.

AC sucks though...like most MB's

greasybenz · #4 08-27-2006, 03:19 PM

they are good cars but i bet youd like the turbo versions better.

The 87 300D has a 6cyl 3.0L 603 engine that was turbocharged and is pretty fast...i have one and love it! Same body style as the 95 just a difference in headlights and hood.

Or you can go up to the 98-99 E300 which had the same 606 engine thats in the 95 but with a turbo and are much faster cars.

But if your not big on power the 95 is a good car.

sixto · #5 08-28-2006, 03:14 AM

Playing devil's advocate - the refinement comes at a cost of relatively complex systems to keep the engine smooth and torquey.

Lot of information in the archives of this forum to make quick work of diagnosis and repair. Otherwise you'll pay for the training of an uneducated/undertrained technician.

Sixto
93 300SD

markg612 · #6 08-30-2006, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixto

Playing devil's advocate - the refinement comes at a cost of relatively complex systems to keep the engine smooth and torquey.

Otherwise you'll pay for the training of an uneducated/undertrained technician.

Sixto

I sort of agree, there are 2 damper valves in the charge tube and manifold assembly that mercedes has engineered to maximize the momentum of the incoming airflow as it starts and stops with intake valve operation and utilize that momentum to "push" extra air into the cylinder augmenting the vacuum created by the intake stroke. Kind of interesting system with a minimal amount of additional equipment installed. Beyond this system, I would find the 606 in my experience to be more reliable and simpler in many respects than my 603. There's a considerable amount of equipment absent in the aspirated model that was required for the turbo. The turbo takes it's toll over the years in higher pressures and temperatures. The aspirated engines are internally identical, this based on part number comparisons I've done. This vs. the 2.3L gas Kompresser vs. non kompresser. same bore and stroke, same casting shapes so to speak but two different engines as the compressor was built to compensate for the pressures, in the 606 case, and the 602s for that matter they were designed to be turbos but started out aspirated. I also thing the 95 124 is a far nicer car than the 87. Nearly 10 years of production perfected an already incredible design that culminated in 95 as one of the most successful vehicles in the companies history. Difficult to do, considering the lineage of the 123s and its industrial durability and design. When I was driving my 87 and 95 interchangeably on a fairly regular bases, the non turbo issue in the 95 was somewhat annoying at highway speeds in the 50-60 MPH range, but around town, the shift points and the gearing of the transmission are set up different, giving much greater agility to the 95 over the 87. You'll get use to it, manual downshift and driving in 3 around town helps immensely. IMHO.

Dead on concerning the education process.