240d versus 300d

[carlivar]

I'm thinking about switching up to a 300d from my current 240d. Was wondering how much of a difference that extra cylinder makes ('79 240D to '82 300D so both non-turbo).

I like my 240D but it is soooooo slow and of course on the larger grades around here in SoCal, I get into the truck lane since I can barely maintain 40-45mph. Not to mention uphill freeway onramps can get a bit tricky when it comes time to merge and I'm still only going 45-50mph at most.

Anyway, does the extra HP in the 300d make a big difference? Is the differential the same ratio? About how many seconds can I shave off my 0-60 time? And how about max speed? My 240d seems "comfortable" at 70mph, though I've gone over 85 in it...

Thanks!
Carl

1982 is turbo.

Big power difference, twice the HP.

[carlivar]

Oops. Make that an '81 I'm looking at. I'm pretty sure it's non turbo.

[nickofoxford]

The 5 cylinders sound a whole lot better than the 240D at idle, IMO. But the horsepower difference is what will get you hooked, and I don't think mileage is a whole lot worse.

[BigRed0803]

You should find you a turbo. The non-turbo 300's don't really have much more power and pickup than a 240D, but a 300DT on the other hand is a breath of fresh air compared to what your used to. In good working order you will not have any problems with a hill.

[t walgamuth]

The non turbo has a lot more usable power than the 240. I love a 240 as long as it has a stick but the extra torque and the taller rear end ratio of the 300 make it much much more relaxed on the highway without much penalty in mileage.

[carlivar]

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

The non turbo has a lot more usable power than the 240. I love a 240 as long as it has a stick but the extra torque and the taller rear end ratio of the 300 make it much much more relaxed on the highway without much penalty in mileage.

Thanks, that's mainly what I was wondering. My current 240d is stick and the 300d I'm looking at is also stick (Euro import). I avoid automatic like the plague.

[pawoSD]

Originally Posted by BigRed0803

You should find you a turbo. The non-turbo 300's don't really have much more power and pickup than a 240D, but a 300DT on the other hand is a breath of fresh air compared to what your used to. In good working order you will not have any problems with a hill.

The N/A 5 cylinder has another 23hp over the 616....of course its going to be better/faster.

[JordaanDMC-12]

Originally Posted by carlivar

I'm thinking about switching up to a 300d from my current 240d. Was wondering how much of a difference that extra cylinder makes ('79 240D to '82 300D so both non-turbo).

I like my 240D but it is soooooo slow and of course on the larger grades around here in SoCal, I get into the truck lane since I can barely maintain 40-45mph. Not to mention uphill freeway onramps can get a bit tricky when it comes time to merge and I'm still only going 45-50mph at most.

Anyway, does the extra HP in the 300d make a big difference? Is the differential the same ratio? About how many seconds can I shave off my 0-60 time? And how about max speed? My 240d seems "comfortable" at 70mph, though I've gone over 85 in it...

Thanks!
Carl

I sold my beloved 240D for an 85 300D Turbo. The extra power is so nice! When you need it it's there! However, I really really miss a few more MPG i got with the 240D. The slow factor never really bothered me except when I hit steep grades as well. To be truthful If I could do it again I would have skipped this 300D kept the 240D until I found a 87 300D Turbo, because that's what I originally wanted. I have a 220D manual which will make me happy with its MPG.

The 240D isn't that bad, if you can get the transmission adjusted to shift late. Oh damn, it can keep up with traffic no prob. I don't know if yours is auto though. they're both amazing in their own way. Drive a 300D and see how you feel. The mpg on my 300D isn't that great though

Just be glad you don't have one of those 29.4 second 200D's!

[jt20]

I am still shocked by how the 617.9 takes off. Even though it has the same horse as a 2nd gen. Supra (non-turbo) and Integra, the take-off is surprisingly ambitious in comparison (for a tank).

Is that what torque does?

[t walgamuth]

Yes.

The non turbo is particularly nice with a stick.

I have a 300na euro motor in my 83 240d with a stick and 307 diff. Its a little iffey taking off but the motor has enough torque that its always a pleasure driving it. I also have a five speed od tranny and on the highway its eriely quiet and smooth.

[IndianaJo]

If I really liked the milage of the 240d, had a car that has had a lot of work done to it (I do) and wanted to go up freeway grades faster in my 240d, I would look at putting a 5 speed in it. Forced induction said 3rd in 240d has 2.25 ratio, which makes useless on freeway- mine's not starting cold, so I can't test top speed in 3rd, but I've never been tempted to run 3rd at 55 in the 240D the way I did in my Chevette. rrnss from india reports an in production an indian 616 compatible (?*) 5 speed pn "The gear box name is G1-18/5B

1st gear ratio 4.695:1
2nd gear ratio 2.401:1
3rd gear ratio 1.436:1
4th gear ratio 1.000:1
5th gear ratio 0.806: 1

reverse 4.078:1"
So if you raised the 240d rear axle ratio from 3.46 to 4.27, 3rd would be same as 1.78 on a standard 240d, making it more useful on the freeway. I don't see any use of a real overdrive in 240d, mine horsepowers out for top speed on the flats. I don't drive over 70 much anyway (*post says some difference in the clutch pilot bearing diameter)

[t walgamuth]

standard diff in 240 is 369. 346 is for 300 na. i think a stock 240 will benefit from a five speed od.

[winmutt]

I miss my 300D Euro with 4 speed. I would certainly take it over a 240D any day. I would *not* get a Federal NA 300D.

I don't know what they did in that M pump but my lil euro would hit 110MPH any day of the week.