S320 S420 S500 buying advice - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

radunegru · #1 08-13-2004, 12:15 PM

I am a proud owner of a W124 300E 2.8 M104 engine.
I amm looking for buyng a S320 s420/430 or s500.Is there any good years for those cars? How is S320 it is somewhat underpower?,because I prefer s320 because of the price and also because I know the engine from my e300

#2 08-13-2004, 12:42 PM

All of these cars are USED. Don't let the features, colors, lack of power or more power enter into your decision near as much as the three most important criteria in selection when buying a used car. These three criteria are:

condition,
Condition,
CONDITION!!!!

The most common mistake in used car selection is selecting the car as if you were buying a new car. When buying a new car, you can select color, equipment, model, etc. Many people will mistakenly make a used car decision based on the same things and not condition. Sometimes you can get lucky doing this and be okay, but you take a huge risk.

Evaluate condition, mileage and maintenance history as utmost concerns.

Good luck,

radunegru · #3 08-13-2004, 12:49 PM

I just want to start looking for an S class and I need to narow my search S320 is less money too,but I'd pay more if s430 is proven better.

A. Rosich · #4 08-13-2004, 09:34 PM

An S 320 is O.K. if you do not crave instant pick-up power. If you do, then my suggestion would be an S 500.

Forget about the S 420, unless as said before, it is in excellent condition. The S 420 is basically a downgraded S 500 created for those who could not basically afford a new 500. At the used car market, the very small price difference between these two models is not even worth considering.

The S 500 in the States comes with nicer interior wood, although it also has the rear self-levelling suspension as standard, which could be a pain and expensive to repair.

ksing44 · #5 08-14-2004, 07:52 AM

Didn’t the S320 come as a shorter wheelbase? I thought the S500 was only in the longer wheelbase. I could be completely wrong about this, but figured I would chime in anyway. I think I would prefer the shorter wheelbase, but I can’t imagine driving around in an S-Class without the 500 motor.

cbdo · #6 08-14-2004, 08:07 AM

The S320 did indeed come in short or long wheelbase; the V8s AFAIK were only offered in the long version.
What Larry said about "condition, condition, condition" is absolutely key for MB, and never more so than for the 140 series. No matter which engine it has, you'll like one that's really, truly, fully sorted out, but you and your bank can be significantly punished otherwise. Do Not make the mistake of buying the green 500 rather than the blue 420 because the color's nicer, and finding out you're the guy who gets to do the wiring harness, head gaskets and AC evaporator! The 140 can be a great car, but it can also chew up $5K faster than you can blink and then come back for the main course.

stevebfl · #7 08-14-2004, 10:05 AM

The S320 is an amazingly well performing car. Has to have something to do with the smaller body.

In general I would advise a 1996 or newer model. The OBDII diagnostics are an improvement when it has problems. Most of the harness problems are gone by 96. The Motronic fuel system is an improvement.

The AC has better controls and easier diagnostocs after 96.

A. Rosich · #8 08-14-2004, 10:20 PM

Actually the shorter or longer wheelbase has not much to do with performance or economy (in Europe and most markets, where all W140s -except the S 280- where available with SWB and LWB, M-B does not list any difference in 0-62 times nor m.p.g. figures).

Although, there is a noticeable (not overwhelming) difference in ride quality from the SWB and LWB. The LWB rides much better. Those extra inches at the wheelbase help.

deanyel · #9 08-15-2004, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cbdo

The S320 did indeed come in short or long wheelbase; the V8s AFAIK were only offered in the long version.

One exception in the US - 1992 400SE was 4.2 V8 in short wheel base. They got SWB 500SEs in Europe.