• Hi Guest !

    Welcome to the 500Eboard forum.

    Since its founding in late 2008, 500Eboard has become the leading resource on the Internet for all things related to the Mercedes-Benz 500E and E500. In recent years, we have also expanded to include the 400E and E420 models, which are directly related to the 500E/E500.

    We invite you to browse and take advantage of the information and resources here on the site. If you find helpful information, please register for full membership, and you'll find even more resources available. Feel free to ask questions, and make liberal use of the "Search" function to find answers.

    We hope you will become an active contributor to the community!

    Sincerely,
    500Eboard Management

07/2016 - Road and Track (online): Reliable vs Durable and the W124

Melville

E500E **Meister**
Member
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a29446/the-difference-between-a-reliable-and-a-durable-car/

Interesting article about reliability vs durability in cars. The W124 is used as a prime example of durable rather than reliable. See the discussion about the early days of the W124 when they were constantly coming back to the dealership.

There Is a Difference Between a Reliable Car and a Durable Car

Everyone says they want a durable car. They really want a reliable one.


I'd say we were a secret society, but that implies that we were capable of keeping secrets, which we were not. Nor were we a select group; I don't recall that any selection ever occurred. Instead, let's call us this: a collection of close-to-minimum-wage teenaged losers who worked at car dealerships during the day and gathered in the long evenings of the early Nineties to eat cheap meals, swap stories, and engage in the occasional impromptu parking-lot race.

Joe was the hardest-working of us; he had risen to assistant manager at his parts department in about the same time it had taken me to quit or be fired by five different dealerships and/or captive-finance organizations. He was disciplined and frugal with his money, but nonetheless, he drove a brand-new Toyota XtraCab with Fittipaldi five-spoke wheels and two Rockford Fosgate amplifiers mounted where the rear passenger seats were supposed to go.

Lately, Joe's day job had become a hell on earth. A few years before, his dealership had started selling a new six-cylinder car, an aerodynamic new design to replace the tired old soldier that used to serve as the company's entry-level sedan. The oldest of those cars were now celebrating their fifth birthdays. They were long out of warranty, but they ate parts like crazy. Joe couldn't keep stock. Everything from the air-conditioning units to the suspension components to the stereos. "These things are junk," Joe fumed. "They come in on flatbeds five times a day. You'd have to be an idiot to buy one."

Can you guess what the car was? Would it help if I told you that the car had a single windshield wiper? "Dumbest (expletive deleted) thing I've ever seen," Joe would snarl. "They sit there in the service bay and the whole car rocks back and forth when you turn it on, and water gets tossed onto the mechanics' toolboxes." One more clue: These were straight-six cars, occasionally available with a manual transmission. "No way they'll last half as long as the old ones," was Joe's constant refrain.

If you're old enough to remember the Eighties, you've probably guessed that the bane of Joe's existence, that notoriously junky six-cylinder flatbed-rider of a sedan, was in fact the almighty Mercedes-Benz W124 300E. How can that be? Good W124s fetch serious money today, up to 30 years after they were built. The W124 entered the automotive Pantheon in earnest when it became the base for the Zuffenhausen-assembled 500E, but they were all brilliant automobiles, and they have become justifiably famous for durability.

Note that I did not say "justifiably famous for reliability." The W124 is not necessarily a reliable car. Not in the way that a brand-new Camry would be a reliable car. In fact, as someone who has owned multiple vehicles from the classic era of Mercedes-Benz, including a 560SL and a 190E 2.3-16, I can state with authority that none of those old Benzes are reliable as such. They are chock-full of complex and delicate feats of engineering that often go awry. The W126 560SEL is arguably the greatest luxury sedan in automotive history and there are plenty of them on the roads with a half-million miles or more, but I defy you to find one where all of the power features work.

As fate would have it, I was visiting Joe for lunch one day when a very well-known 380SEC coupe arrived for service. This car, which had been covered in the print magazines of the day, had racked up over 800,000 miles in under 10 years. The owner used it for cross-country travel, and whenever it required service, he just stopped at the nearest Benz dealer and had it performed immediately. If the dealership found any other problems, he paid for them to be repaired promptly, without much regard for cost.

The minute the SEC was loaded onto one of the two-post lifts, we popped the hood and crawled all over it. Sure enough, it was an 870,000-mile S-class coupe. The engine was original. But everywhere you looked under the hood, there were shiny new components with recent stickers on them. We estimated that the big Benz had seen over 250 oil changes. "A Toyota truck," Joe declared with authority, "would do this mileage with nothing but basic service."

"Yeah," I retorted, "until the frame rusted into powder at the four-year mark." Joe and I had spent the previous summer doing rust repair on an '83 Toyota 4x4. It was just seven years old, but it needed to have the bed pulled, acid-dipped, and repainted. The frame, too, had needed rust repair.

Those were the cars we considered "reliable" at the time, in an era where brand-new cars often failed to start in cold conditions and a 100,000 reading on an odometer was un-ironically called "the miracle mile." In point of fact, what they were was durable. The same way a VW Beetle was durable. The basic parts—engine, transmission, suspension—lasted a long time. It was possible to repair or refurbish everything back to running condition. But it was well understood that you needed to do a complete engine rebuild at or before that miracle-mile mark. Imagine if a manufacturer sold a new car today that needed a complete engine-out rebuild at 80,000 miles. Consumer Reports would instigate a riot. There would be blood in the streets.

Yet the alert reader will notice the presence of plenty of W126 Benzes and VW Beetles on the road long after most of the cars built 10 or even 20 years after them have been recycled into Chinese top-loading dishwashers. That stubborn durability that the old cars showed sometimes, that deliberate or inadvertent over-engineering and over-specification, is a thing of the past. The 1995 Camry was probably the best car in the world when it was new, and I never knew anybody to have serious trouble with them. But one by one they've simply disappeared. They were engineered very thoroughly to meet certain durability targets. Having met them, they fade away into the junkyard like forgotten soldiers.

Durability and reliability are not the same thing. The first-gen Land Rover Discovery was not reliable. I had two brand-new ones. I know. But they are durable. The basic bones will last a long time. You just have to keep working on the thing, and it will keep going through abysmal conditions . . . with every idiot light on the dashboard shining bright. My mother had a 2000 Hyundai Elantra that was perfectly reliable. It gave her 150,000 miles without so much as a bad alternator. Then one day we looked up and it was a rusted-out hulk with an insatiable appetite for parts that were no longer in dealer inventory. We couldn't have kept it going at any reasonable cost.

I have come to believe that engineering reliability into a car takes all sorts of admirable human qualities: intelligence, persistence, self-awareness, willingness to follow best practices and enlarge upon them. Building a durable car? That just takes stubbornness. You just throw more and better materials at the thing, and you refuse to worry too much about conforming to the fashion of the era. Just 10 minutes riding around with me in my 560SL would have made it plain to you why it was durable. Everything on it weighed a ton and felt like it had been beaten out of a pig iron by a medieval blacksmith.

By contrast, my Accord features intelligent materials choices and components that bear all the hallmarks of a zillion CAD iterations. I would be highly surprised if anything went wrong with it in the foreseeable future. But I doubt the tricky single-cam 24-valve V-6 will last as long as the simple, understressed V-8 in the 560SL.

Everybody says they want a durable car, but what they really want is a reliable car. Ten trouble-free years, 15 if it can be managed, and then consign the thing to a junkyard. We all understand that model very well now, because consumer electronics work that way. You don't repair an iPhone. You expect it to work perfectly until the day you throw it away and forget about it. An iPhone that required weekly maintenance would be unacceptable.

That's the challenge that faces all of the luxury-car manufacturers nowadays. Their cars have to be just as reliable as a Honda, but some of the customers will complain violently if the product can't match an old R107-generation SL for durability. Even if they don't keep the car that long. The worst part is that they don't just to have to match that old SL; they have to match the perception of that old SL as a perfect and trouble-free perpetual-motion machine.

A few months ago I stopped by and visited Joe at the dealership. He'd been the best of us, making it to parts manager when I was still working construction-site cleanup, but having reached that position he'd simply stayed there for the rest of his life. "How are those new Benzes?" I inquired, watching a shiny new SL AMG get a final detailing in the hospital-clean service bay.

"Oh, they're pretty good," he said. "I mean, you have some problems. But overall they're okay. Nothing like the old ones, though. Remember those W124s? They lasted forever!"
 
You beat me to posting this, Marc. Baruth didn't knock this out of the park. The ball exploded into powder...
 
You beat me to posting this, Marc. Baruth didn't knock this out of the park. The ball exploded into powder...

I agree. He's a talented writer with a unique voice (I can usually tell he wrote something just by reading the first couple of paragraphs). Sometimes it seems he writes things just to get a strong reaction (not necessarily a bad thing but I find I stop reading half way through). This however was a great article all the way.

When he wrote about his friend who complained about all the problems with new W124s, I was thinking of one of your posts where you said, when they were new, you would not recommend a W124 to a non-enthusiast but you happily recommended the W210 to them because it has so many fewer issues when new.
 
I took away from this people are more interested in knowing when something would break (reliability) over knowing it would/could last a long time (durability).


Robert
 
I think there are other ways of wording the same thing.

You have a Rolex and a Casio G-shock.

Both are great, well made watches. But one will require periodic maintence by a specialist, sometimes needing expensive parts. One way or another your spending some money. The other, you wear it to work for 10 years, beat the snot out of it, and when the battery finally dies, you buy another.

Same thing with a Mercedes to Toyota Camry comparison.
 
Sounds to me like Joe was biased against the W124 just like I was (and still am) against the W123, lol.

You still couldn't get me into a Camry of any vintage. Something totally ignored here is safety. I'd rather be in something that will withstand a 60mph impact from any direction with a very high chance of survivability, without being a vegetable. Does it cost me more to patch up an old, un-reliable 124 than to drive a newer under-warranty Camry? Probably. Is the Camry safer? Probably not. Given the vast quantity of cell-wielding muppets on the roads today, and the fact I can't afford new/newer MB's... I'll keep my 124. Joe can go hug his old Toyotas and that 380SEC.

:grouphug:
 
Sidenote, I have never heard any one say they wanted a "durable car". Everyone tells me they want a "reliable car". That tells me the article is flawed.

I believe the average car owner today is more concerned with getting from A to B and cost. That is not my criteria for owning a vehicle.
 
Sidenote, I have never heard any one say they wanted a "durable car". Everyone tells me they want a "reliable car". That tells me the article is flawed.

I believe the average car owner today is more concerned with getting from A to B and cost. That is not my criteria for owning a vehicle.

Totally agree, Ken.
And reliability is very subjective because to the general population, reliable means that nothing goes wrong no matter how much they neglect it. People want a maintenance free car that lasts for hundreds of thousands of miles and proclaim a car unreliable because a tail light burns out.
 
Sidenote, I have never heard any one say they wanted a "durable car". Everyone tells me they want a "reliable car". That tells me the article is flawed.

I believe the average car owner today is more concerned with getting from A to B and cost. That is not my criteria for owning a vehicle.

Indeed, that is my only objection to the article. But then, remember that he is an enthusiast talking to enthusiasts and I think he is referring to the fact that we often revere "durable" cars while somebody, particularly a non-enthusiast saying "reliable" means something completely different.

He nailed the dichotomy that I frequently talk about, where somebody will ask "how's those newer cars?" when he is actually talking about "reliability" and just like that guy whose vision is being rose colored by time and nostalgia, someone will say "fine, but not near as good as those 124's" somehow completely forgetting that by standards of "reliability" which is what the questioner is actually referring to, the 124 was a shit box beyond imagining. Now, don't do the next idiotic thing and start telling me about 123s and 126s. I've worked on those since they were brand-new, too. They are durable.
They were never "reliable".

All that being said, I would rather push many "durable" cars than drive most "reliable" cars, and so would Baruth. He is talking to us about us, and he nails it...
:jono:
 
Last edited:
Sounds to me like Joe was biased against the W124 just like I was (and still am) against the W123, lol.

You still couldn't get me into a Camry of any vintage. Something totally ignored here is safety. I'd rather be in something that will withstand a 60mph impact from any direction with a very high chance of survivability, without being a vegetable. Does it cost me more to patch up an old, un-reliable 124 than to drive a newer under-warranty Camry? Probably. Is the Camry safer? Probably not. Given the vast quantity of cell-wielding muppets on the roads today, and the fact I can't afford new/newer MB's... I'll keep my 124. Joe can go hug his old Toyotas and that 380SEC.

:grouphug:

Hard to say really. Most cars designed and built in the last ten years are probably as safe or more safe than any W124. Cars really have come a long way with better steels, airbags, anti-lock brakes and traction control.
 
And reliability is very subjective because to the general population, reliable means that nothing goes wrong no matter how much they neglect it. People want a maintenance free car that lasts for hundreds of thousands of miles and proclaim a car unreliable because a tail light burns out.
+ eleventybillion. ^^^



Hard to say really. Most cars designed and built in the last ten years are probably as safe or more safe than any W124. Cars really have come a long way with better steels, airbags, anti-lock brakes and traction control.
I would say some cars over the last 10 years are probably similar to the 124 as far as safety... but I don't agree with "most". Yes, many have come a long way, but the 124 (and most older Mercedes) were far ahead of their time in the safety category. I've had several family members, myself included, involved in moderate to severe accidents. In each case I believe the outcome would have been far, far worse in most any other vehicle.

It would be interesting to find out the numbers of different vehicle classes produced / sold over the last ~10 years; the proliferation of super-size SUV's may be skewing the overall 'safe' numbers higher, but it still seems there are an awful lot of tin-can econoboxes rolling around...

:hornets:
 
I have seen many w124/W126 in the yards with crushed front or rear ends and the damn glass is in tact, not even a buckle on the A pillars. No so much on the ubiquitous Honda or Toyota (or their upscale version of the same car under a different badge).
 
I have seen many w124/W126 in the yards with crushed front or rear ends and the damn glass is in tact, not even a buckle on the A pillars. No so much on the ubiquitous Honda or Toyota (or their upscale version of the same car under a different badge).
Yes... wandering around a salvage yard with many different makes/models can be quite enlightening.

This is a somewhat extreme example, but check out the pics here if you haven't seen them before:
http://www.500eboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9275

:duck:
 
We need to be careful, just because a car stays together or falls apart in a severe accident isn't enough proof to say it's safe or not. A minor cabin intrusion with full side and front airbag deployment may protect the occupants better than a fully intact passenger compartment with only front airbags.
 
We need to be careful, just because a car stays together or falls apart in a severe accident isn't enough proof to say it's safe or not. A minor cabin intrusion with full side and front airbag deployment may protect the occupants better than a fully intact passenger compartment with only front airbags.
True. However, the author specifically mentioned the W124/300E along with a 1995 Camry, 2000 Hyundai Elantra, and an unspecified-year Honda Accord.

My specific concern is a severe accident. Fender-benders are somewhat irrelevant, the chance for significant injury is relatively low. Even with brand-new cars, would you rather be in a 2017 E-class when hit by a Suburban, or a 2017 Camry/Elantra/Accord? I know which I would pick. I can't afford a new MB, my budget limits us to older iron. Within that budget, I'd still rather be in a 124, 126, or 140 in a severe accident.

Reliability, as mentioned previously, is awfully subjective. The only times our MB's had to be towed (besides accidents) were due to failures of tires, batteries, one pinholed upper radiator hose, and one seized ignition lock. The first 2 would affect any car; the second two could have been avoided with proper maintenance. This is over 20+ years, btw; and probably over a dozen different 123's, 124's, and 210's. I guess the follow-up question is, what is considered a failure in reliability? Anything that doesn't work correctly, or just something that makes the car non-driveable?

:stirthepot:
 
Well, if being t-boned by a Suburban, I'd rather be in a 2017 Accord with side curtain airbags vs any W124. Not only would I be more likely to survive but the MB wouldn't be damaged ;-)

Btw, I thought we were comparing 10 YO or newer cars specifically to the W124?
 
Sidenote, I have never heard any one say they wanted a "durable car". Everyone tells me they want a "reliable car". That tells me the article is flawed.

I believe the average car owner today is more concerned with getting from A to B and cost. That is not my criteria for owning a vehicle.

It's pretty clear to me that I'll take "durable"... That's probably because I view them as man-made machines, and machines break. It's kinda what they do. Given that, do you want to repair the machine, or replace the machine? I'd rather repair, because over the long haul the costs are lower and the results more acceptable, seems to me.

A durable machine with the faulty parts replaced tends to be a reliable one. It just makes sense to me. But maybe that's why I've got a bunch of durable stuff lying around.

Cars run, stuff breaks, I replace stuff, and the cars keep running. As time passes, "durable" becomes "vintage", then "timeless" -- which is worth more to me than "reliable".

;-D

maw
 
How do we get the crash test people to do a full barrage of tests (front, side, offset/overlap, etc) on 25 year old cars? :D I'd like to see how the 124 fares in current tests.

IIHS didn't have side-impact photos or video on the 2013 Accord (or any newer Accord sedan). Although it rated well, the front door pillar intrusion looked scary on the frontal impact. Check out the slow-motion video too:
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/honda/accord-4-door-sedan

The W212 seemed visibly better although the IIHS comments don't quite support that, compared to the Accord above.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/mercedes-benz/e-class-4-door-sedan


The discussion gets complicated since price is a realistic factor for most people. For example, what do you put your 16-year old new driver in? A $30k newer Accord, or a $3k W124 with ASR? I'm getting off the reliable/durable topic here - apologies!

:doh:
 
I remember captruff telling about this a few years ago when it happened. The article / report was about this "mystery priest" that showed up at an accident scene but the reporter also noted the following about the car which just happened to be a 124:

...Firefighters had been struggling for nearly an hour to get the teen, Katie Lentz, out of her crumpled Mercedes-Benz after a drunken driver crossed the middle line of the two-lane highway and struck her head-on about 9 a.m. Sunday, officials told the news station. The smoke-eaters desperately tried to reach Lentz — who was pinned between her seat and the steering wheel — but the heavy steel of the car kept dulling the blades of their cutting tools, Reed said.

...“It was a very well-built car,” Reed said. “And when you compact materials like that one, they become even stronger because you’re cutting through multiple things instead of one layer.”



http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...e-missouri-crash-disappears-article-1.1421027


Pretty much sums it up for me.... :mbstar:
 

Attachments

  • image1.jpg
    image1.jpg
    88.1 KB · Views: 16
  • image2.jpg
    image2.jpg
    102.8 KB · Views: 13
Last edited:
I would guess the W124 would fare well in crash tests but if I have to get in an accident I would rather be in my W212 with a gazillion airbags.
 
I would guess the W124 would fare well in crash tests but if I have to get in an accident I would rather be in my W212 with a gazillion airbags.
I hear you Maui there is a whole lot to be said about the safety engineering improvements over the last 20 or so years and MB vs MB I would agree with your position. However taking the laws of physics into consideration assuming the airbag is still functioning as designed I'd still take my 500E (and my 210 for that matter) over most current cars and especially anything that generally falls under the "economy car" umbrella.

[emoji123]

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
What a terrific article and captures something I have struggled to explain to some people about the W124. Working on the W124 has blown my mind, it is at such a level of over-engineered craftsmanship and makes my Porsche 964 (form the same era), feel so much more poorly engineered overall.
 
The discussion gets complicated since price is a realistic factor for most people. For example, what do you put your 16-year old new driver in? A $30k newer Accord, or a $3k W124 with ASR? I'm getting off the reliable/durable topic here - apologies!
:doh:

Yes, this... I will be at this decision point in another year or so as my oldest hits 16. My wife is getting more insistent on getting a modern car with all the airbags $$$$ and I am thinking to fix up an older W124 which is perceived as not as safe.
 
I don't often hear someone say they want a durable car either.
However, I have heard, "I want a car that will last me a long time."
Or, "I want a dependable car."
Put those statements in which ever category you want to.

I am of the opinion that people want a car that last a long time and also does not have too many costs outside of regular maintenance.

I think that the W124 had the chance to be that car that "durable car" and that "reliable car".
More on that later.....

Sidenote, I have never heard any one say they wanted a "durable car". Everyone tells me they want a "reliable car". That tells me the article is flawed.

I believe the average car owner today is more concerned with getting from A to B and cost. That is not my criteria for owning a vehicle.
 
While I am off the topic, my sister was driving a 1966 Plymouth Belvedere and a Datsun 280 hit her head on. The Belvedere survived long enough for my brother to run it into a telephone pole....and the car was still drivable, true story.
 
I don't often hear someone say they want a durable car either.
However, I have heard, "I want a car that will last me a long time."
Or, "I want a dependable car."
Put those statements in which ever category you want to.

I am of the opinion that people want a car that last a long time and also does not have too many costs outside of regular maintenance.

I think that the W124 had the chance to be that car that "durable car" and that "reliable car".
More on that later.....

Sorry, "This Space For Rant"
:klink:

Stevester, they had the chance. They didn't take it.

:hornets:

All 124s were "durable". The proof is that they are still driving around all over the world. None of the bigger engined "luxury" versions we got were ever "reliable" in the conventional sense. Many of the 124s on the road now are actually more conventional sense "reliable" today than back when they were new. So much was developed after production. I was there guys. Joe was right. Flatbeds all day long. Fuel pump controllers, power supply/overvoltage units, 103 motors with 2 and 3 valve jobs before they were out of warranty, 2 and 3 water pumps before they were out of warranty, motor mounts with every oil change, EZLs, ignition switches, steering locks, ignition tumblers, door tumbler/handle microswitches, alarm control units, head gaskets on every inline engine, ENDLESS climate control repairs of every possible kind, and in southern states, often 2 evaporators before they were out of warranty, catalysts with loose elements, windows that turned to INVISIBLE with interior fog when hitting a puddle AT NIGHT on the highway! You couldn't even wipe it, the fog re-formed a half inch behind your panicked hand!
3 Becker radios before they were out of warranty, seat switches, 3 in warranty driveshaft flex discs.

Did I mention wiring harnesses? :stickpoke:

How about the later electronic era cars in unpredictable full limp throttle mode AGES before the wiring did that to them? Most dying in the middle of the intersection as the driver attempted to shoot across traffic!
:shocking:
And, no that WASN'T just cars with ASR, as if that would have made it excusable!
We called it "get killed mode" All day long, some cars 3 times in a year before replacement parts got any good...

DESPITE all this, they were, and still are magnificent. Ask me my overall favorite MB, and I'd be hard pressed to not default to the 124. ANY 124. But DON'T think they were the all time yardstick of developmental quality control.
For what it's worth, older generations of MB weren’t really any better at all. There was just less to go wrong...
:matrix:
 
Last edited:
DESPITE all this, they were, and still are magnificent. Ask me my overall favorite MB, and I'd be hard pressed to not default to the 124. ANY 124. But DON'T think they were the all time yardstick of developmental quality control. For what it's worth, older generations of MB weren’t really any better at all. There was just less to go wrong...
Which is why I'm happy that previous owners worked out some of the 'teething' issues early in the life of my 124's! :D I do wonder about the percentage of failed 124's... remember, the service departments only see the defective cars and unhappy owners. They rarely get visited by the trouble-free cars with happy owners (well, except for scheduled maintenance, if the owner doesn't go to an indy).

I've been a passenger in multiple newer (<10 years old) Japanese vehicles, and driven a few. Crash ratings nonwithstanding, I'd still feel safer in a 124 (or most any year/model MB post-1980) than the vast majority of Asian imports. Don't get me started on the actual driving experience, almost every new/newer car (either Asian or American) I've driven feels like an appliance; and a cheap buzzy one at that.

:bbq:
 
Got to agree with Klink here....I worked with an Orthopedic surgeon who bought a 124 wagon from new, wanted desperately to impress everyone with his Mercedes. He hated the damn thing, everything went wrong.

He was not a "car guy", and could care less about how it drove or felt. He wanted something reliable that would impress the neighbors. He got rid of it and bought a big Lexus sedan, and never looked back. Said he would never buy another Mercedes after that.

I wonder how many times over that story could be told?
 
I've been a passenger in multiple newer (<10 years old) Japanese vehicles, and driven a few. Crash ratings nonwithstanding, I'd still feel safer in a 124 (or most any year/model MB post-1980) than the vast majority of Asian imports. Don't get me started on the actual driving experience, almost every new/newer car (either Asian or American) I've driven feels like an appliance; and a cheap buzzy one at that.

I just had the unfortunate opportunity to rent a new Toyota Camry. For a week. It's a big car. But I felt like I was driving a 15 year-old Honda civic. And it drove like complete shite!
 
I am in the middle of replacing all 4 hoses to the monovalve on the C126 as one of them had a leak.

I love my 500Es, and they have been pretty reliable over the seven years I have owned them.

The whole experience of owning a 129, 126 and a fleet of 124s would have been extremely frustrating if it were not for Gerry, GSXR, Jono, Klink, and others on this site.

Truth be told, I would not attempt to own any of these cars without you guys because they would break my bank account.

BTW, the older 126 is easier for this novice mechanic to move about, and the quality of some of its parts "seem" slightly better than many 124 parts.:hiding:
 
Last edited:
Andy, I think you highlight a major distinction here:

Some people want to impress others with what they drive (like your surgeon buddy). And some could care less about other people's opinions and are interested in their car's driving experience, performance, and appearance (probably in that order). I suspect most of us on this forum tend to fall into the latter category. I know I sure do!

:pc1:
 
I just had the unfortunate opportunity to rent a new Toyota Camry. For a week. It's a big car. But I felt like I was driving a 15 year-old Honda civic. And it drove like complete shite!
We have several friends with late model Nissan Altimas. My wife and I cannot believe how uncomfortable the back seats are in those things!

:blink:
 
And don't get me started on the exterior design of some of these things...
How about the front of the new Lexus, or the side view of the Nissans with the swoops that go nowhere...
Maybe they're trying to make Bangle look good??
 
And don't get me started on the exterior design of some of these things...
How about the front of the new Lexus, or the side view of the Nissans with the swoops that go nowhere...
Maybe they're trying to make Bangle look good??


:plusone: ,000. Amen!!!

I'm sorry if anyone here owns a newer Lexus but I don't know that the hell they are thinking with their current styling. I mean don't get me wrong for the money I really think Lexus makes a great knockoff Mercedes / disposable luxury car but the front ends on the new ones are down right hideous. The ridicously oversized grills look like Darth Vader's mouth! It's Aztek bad.
:throwup:


Lexus-NX-turbo-performance-keyfeatures-435x327-LEX-NXG-MY15-0214.jpg 5303.jpg





 
Got to agree with Klink here....I worked with an Orthopedic surgeon who bought a 124 wagon from new, wanted desperately to impress everyone with his Mercedes. He hated the damn thing, everything went wrong.

He was not a "car guy", and could care less about how it drove or felt. He wanted something reliable that would impress the neighbors. He got rid of it and bought a big Lexus sedan, and never looked back. Said he would never buy another Mercedes after that.

I wonder how many times over that story could be told?

Thousands, I'm sure.
:doh:

Yet the overall product presentation, design, driving experience and safety bring them back. Even your example Dr. thinks about it now and again, and/or has already done it.

I've long said that no one would ever buy more than one Euro/Brit car if they didn't drive or look the way they do. I try to remain thankful for that every day, all day. For the customers, and for MB that somehow keeps making product that people want to buy and keep...
:klink:
 
LOL. I was trying to leave appearance out of the equation... factor that in and whooooo, a lot of possibilities get ruled out!

:tigger:
 
Amen!!! ...a great knockoff Mercedes / disposable luxury car

ROTFLMAO!!

E, I'll be using that "disposable luxury car" bit... full attribution of course.

I don't know. I grew up on Hondas and Nissans, as well as the Big 3. The latter were neither reliable nor durable. The former were reliable, but that's like saying the ugly chick has a great personality. It's somehow not doing it for me. Durable, however, means I can put a pillow over her head and get away with it...

Jokes

;-D

maw
 
Last edited:

Who has viewed this thread (Total: 1) View details

Back
Top