Comparison: Volvo 240DL and Mercedes 300D - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

#1 06-04-2002, 04:16 PM

Sorry for so many questions guys. I hear good things about both of these cars. Many friends have high mileage cars in both of these models. You guys are probably a bit biased towards the Mercedes Diesel, but what is a more reliable car. If I bought a Mercedes Diesel with 150K and a Volvo 240Dl with 150K, which would by the more reliable automobile? I hear so much about both of these, but I look the Mercedes more. Just curious on your opinions. Also, overall repair costs less or more on a 300D? Thanks. Once again sorry for so many questions

Trelinski · #2 06-04-2002, 05:34 PM

From what I've heard, the volvo 240 is the only car that can hope to match the Mercedes Diesel in durability. When I started looking for a car my dad made two suggestions, Mercedes Diesel, or Volvo 240. Obviously a volvo 240 is not the car I would want (I am 19).

I went to a demolition derby last weekend. A real hick show, but anyway. They brought in the heat and it was all 80's American cars, and one volvo 240. I knew as soon as I saw it that it would win. Needless to say, it did. The amount of damage it sustained was incredible.

I realize this doesnt actually answer any of your questions, but I thought I'd trhow in my thoughts.

rickg · #3 06-04-2002, 05:41 PM

I worked in a wrecking yard back in the early '80's. Both the Benz's and Volvo's would run forever. I think it would be a draw.

#4 06-04-2002, 07:42 PM

I would think the diesel engine would take more of a pounding

#5 06-04-2002, 10:43 PM

One thing that wasn't commented on. The Volvo diesel was a VW diesel engine with two more pots added. It was still an aluminum head, belt driven OHC engine.

Of course, Volvo owners probably took better care of their cars than VW owners did, but I would hedge the bet in MB's way on the rubber belt issue with the Volvo - not that I wouldn't own one in a heartbeat if a too sweet deal would've fell in my lap prior to buying the Benzes. They were very well built cars in their day.

rickg · #6 06-05-2002, 12:03 AM

Of course, then there is the issue of style. Know anyone that thinks those old square Volvos were 'classy looking', let alone even good looking??

DieselHead · #7 06-05-2002, 12:57 AM

My family owned a 1985 240DL wagon and it died at 106,000 miles. Completely died. And, throughout its life, so many random things were replaced: the a/c compressor, part of the heater unit, the muffler several times, random switches, etc. The only good thing about that car was its strong engine. Oh, and it started to rust what I would consider prematurely.

Alex

Trelinski · #8 06-05-2002, 01:12 AM

"Of course, then there is the issue of style. Know anyone that thinks those old square Volvos were 'classy looking', let alone even good looking??"

They grow on you...I'm starting to like 'em!

#9 06-05-2002, 07:48 AM

Come on, let's get serious here. Do you really believe that you can compare an aluminum head, rubber timing belt engine to an all cast iron, double row timing chain engine. Which one do you REALLY think will be more durable and long lived? Which one will much more easily warp a head? Which one needs a timing belt every 60,000 miles? Come on!

Okay, lets just say that you can, even though this is comparing oranges to apples, get the same level of engine durability and life from both. Have you ever seen a 20 year old Volvo that has spent any time at all in the heat? If you have, you know that all the plastic inside is wrinkled and shredded. An MB that has been exposed to the heat and sun will not look like new, but it will look a darn sight better than a Volvo exposed to the same elements.

Get real here, I'm all for being polite, but there is no comparison whatsoever. If it were 1980, and we had both cars brand new sitting side by side, you would be hard pressed to tell the difference in quality. But this is over 20 years later and we now have the knowledge of seeing how they hold up.

With those comparisons made, let's compare the Volve 240D to many other cars. Comparing it to most other cars built at the same time, it would come out highly superior.

My $0.02,

pkmorgan17 · #10 06-05-2002, 10:53 AM

Kyle,

I may be uniquely qualified to respond to this question - I own a 1988 240 DL with 125,000 miles and a 1982 300 TD with 195,000 miles. Both are in excellent shape and have been well taken care of during the course of their "lives" (I have all records from previous owners). So here is my take on your question:

The 240 is a simpler car, simpler systems, engine etc. While both are reliable in that they will start and they will run everyday, for a long time - the MB is a more sophistacated machine and hence is more likely to have little nagging problems - vacuum system issues, oil leaks, etc. And I understand that the transmission is likely to need a rebuild anytime after 125,000 miles, though I have not had that experience, yet.

Now - which car do I like better? The MB - it rides so solidly and beautifully, especially on the highway. The Volvo is better suited for around town driving, it is lighter and quicker.

Which car has more cache? The MB, all the way.

So, the decision is up to you. I would say you cannot lose with either.

Factors to consider:

Reliability, broad issues: A wash, both are legends. Though, I would say that the MB has a higher mileage engine life: 300,000 to 500,000 is not uncommon.

Reliability, little issues: favors Volvo

Driving pleasure:
Highway driving favors the MB 300
Local driving favors the Volvo 240

Safety - I would say the MB is safer because it is a heavier car - but that's just a guess.

MPG - about the same, approximately 25 MPG, though diesel is usually cheaper.

Resale: As miles go up I would say the MB - engine has greater stamina past 200,000 miles.

Chicks dig more? - The MB!

Good luck.

Please let us know what you chose.

Nate Stanley · #11 06-05-2002, 11:39 AM

My money's on the Benz. Here's why (and this is just my opinion)-

1) I have a friend who has put way too many $s into a 4-cyl Volvo gasser. He used to own a 240D until it was totalled, but he misses the Benz, and regrets the day he bought the Volvo. Loads of repairs on engine and auxiliary systems. And the 4-cyl was supposed to be more reliable than the six.

2) Personal observation-- There are a LOT more nice 20-year old Benzes in my area, especially the W123 bodies, than there are 20-year old Volvos. I have a friend that has an otherwise nice early 90's 740 whose clearcoat is peeling everywhere, there's no headroom in it due their short roofline (it's got the sliding sunroof), and the interior rattles in several places.

3) Dittos as to the belt vs. chain issue. Mine has 244K miles and there is no visible chain stretch, and PO has no recollection of it having been done.

Robert W. Roe · #12 06-05-2002, 01:19 PM

I had a 91 Volvo 940GLE wagon with the 2.5-16V four and it never got much over 17 mpg on premium, which the owner's manual required. Fast, but no road feel. My wife wanted a Volvo wagon in the worst way then got sick of driving it after a year or so, so I ended up driving it for several years. Traded it on my 84 SD.

Reliability? WELL... It threw a belt, stranding my wife, once, and lost its water pump, stranding me, and was not glued together really well; the whole inside plastic part of the rear tailgate came off. The belly pan fell of in my driveway, and a hubcap fell off somewhere in Virginia. The CD changer died. The alarm system used to baffle Volvo mechanics and was a pain. The AC leaked. Leather seats were wearing when I sold it. Tranny overdrive solenoid died, keeping the car from shifting out of third gear.

Overall the car cost me about $15K in repairs and depreciation over 4 1/2 years. My Benz has cost me less than half that in 3 years, and has gotten 3-5 mpg better overall fuel economy.

#13 06-05-2002, 02:48 PM

Have you guys heard of Irv Gordon, he claim his car just passed two millions miles ( a volvo ).

#14 06-05-2002, 03:19 PM

Yes but let's not compare oranges to apples. The Volvo you're talking about with two million miles is a p1800. This is a good old fashioned, all iron, roller timing chain car. The p1800 was a solid built automobile.

Have a great day,

gnolo · #15 06-05-2002, 03:37 PM

The engine of this p1800 has been rebuilt one time and if I remember well it is 2 milions kilometers, not miles.