Interesting feedback guys, but I'd like to know what exactly the term 'over-engineered' means in the context of these cars; what was it that differentiated a 190e from a later C-class? Well, apart from rust, obviously! Is there anyone here of an engineering bent who knows what special measures Mercedes used to go to and how/why they changed? I suspect computer aided design may have something to do with it, allows cars to be engineered to much finer tolerances.
Perhaps a good analogy can be drawn with the Forth Bridge; massively over-engineered to prevent a repeat of the Tay Bridge disaster, its designers wanted to leave as big a margin for error as possible. Of course, nowadays, everything can be calculated to the nth degree and so there is no need for such margins - they are simply too expensive. Is it true to say that Mercedes adopted a similar attitude in their 'glory days' to avoid any chance of producing an unreliable, ephemeral dog?
|
Hector
190 metal thickness on body panels was probably 50% thicker than competitors. Fuel consumption was lousy. If you had ever been in one, ride and handling were nothing special.
All this "over engineering " is rubbish. Mercedes made parts up to Japanese standrads of reliability but had thick heavy bodies with poor rust protection on sills and wings.. Did not matter with thick steel.
Longevity? Well yes.. IF serviced properly. But no better than Japanese...
In my view it is rose tinted glasses by people who could not afford to buy Mercedes when new. And who probably drove crap designed by Rover of Chrysler or GM... all of whom had a lousy quality reputation both for design and build quality.
A Lexus was far better than any equivalent Mercedes - but had no diesels. How many rusty GS300 or LS400 do you see ?
Edited by madf on 12/12/2009 at 13:29
|
|
|
|
DB taxis(only MB in UK)were built to a different specification to normal saloons.Incidentally both Peugeot and Ford were offered as taxis in the same markets and again were a different build spec. to saloons.
|
I have a W124 Merc E320. I would say the "overengineered" is probably in reference to the fact that someone obviously spent a great deal of time going over every inch of the car trying to think how to make it work better than the competition, or at least differently. You don't generally get that feeling with modern cars, and certainly not the modern E-Class.
The multilink rear suspension was also a genuine revolution at the time, vastly improving the road manners compared to the antiquated W123 and making the contemporary BMW 5 Series look like an antique overnight. The aerodynamic styling was very controversial and caused the German taxi drivers in 1985 to go on a mass protest at the Daimler-Benz HQ in Sindelfingen to demand the reintroduction of the "proper Mercedes" W123. Additionally, there was the single cam-mounted windscreen wiper and a very odd type of recirculating ball steering that combined a feeling of precision with complete isolation from the road, again giving the driver the feeling they were driving something a bit unusual.
I could go on about the various other design features such as the rain diverting A-pillars, the third sunvisor over the rear view mirror, the laminated rear screen with the heating elements in the lamination or the truly bizarre vacuum operated tipping mechanism for the front seats. Overall I find it very relaxing to drive, it's fast, sure footed and has suspension far more compliant than any modern car. The 220bhp engine has an easy job shifting it as it doesn't weigh much more than a modern Golf, despite being cleverly styled to look like it's been carved from stone.
If you are thinking of buying one, bear in mind they are not indestructible despite popular opinion and were very expensive to buy at the time which can be reflected in parts prices. They are also mechanically complex and the high spec ones are electrically complex, mine has 7 ECUs. On the positive side, Mercedes and Bosch can supply any component new or reconditioned. Good ones are getting rare. In the last 2 months I've had 2 people offer to buy mine!
|
Mercedes were much sought after in Rhodesia in rural areas. They all clocked up many hundreds of thousands of miles on gravel and strip roads, many of them rarely seeing a tar road.
Once a neighbour was ambushed in his merc on the way to town. The car took many hits and and although wounded he drove through the ambush to the next farm. When the car was recovered to the police station as was the procedure, an unexploded RPG was found in the boot. The car was patched up and rebuilt and lasted the him out.
Runner up to the Mercedes was the ubiquitous Peugeot 404 and later the 504, although these did not last quite as long as the old mercs they were well built and apropriatly engineered for Africa where Land Rovers were too slow, thirsty and uncomfortable for the school run.
|
|
|
|
>>I'd like to know what exactly the term 'over-engineered' means
I think you ask an excellent question HB.
In most cases, in my opinion, it's absolute nonsense - the worst marketing twaddle.
If you really wanted to evaluate the engineering margin in a part, and compare it against a competitor, then, you would need to do some serious work - much more serious work than any motoring journalist would ever consider.
Let's say you wanted to evaluate a front lower suspension ball joint. You would need to know [at the very least!] the mass of the car, the proportion of the mass on the front axle, the design conditions under which the ball joint was designed, the load distribution in the suspension at that loading condition, and hence the load in the ball joint, then, you would need to know about the material specification of the ball joint, its yield load, and its fatigue response.
So, we're left with guff like how heavy a "thunk" the door makes as it closes [a few well placed blocks of sound deadening can make a world of difference here!], and how well the dashboard looks to have been made.
The only real way the judgement can be made is via hindsight - even then, there are model differences, because people do tend to spend more to keep a car like a MB on the road, compared with something more mundane - people are more likely to be silly** about a W124 than they might be over a Rover 800.
There are, however, some engineered features which do differentiate older MBs which did cost a lot to include;
- the steering box, as described gives really good isolation and on-centre feel
- the elctrical connectors, the wiring gauges chosen, and the quality of the working parts most of the electrical fittings is top notch, with most bearing a Bosch logo.
- the pre-electronic automatic gearboxes, had some extra hydraulic complication compared with many more ordinary gearboxes to provide a softer shift
- the self levelling rear suspension, especially on estates allows the car to remain level even if heavily laden without resorting to harsh suspension settings. Alas, these simple systems are much misunderstood by most mechanics - reports of MOT failures from the "brake proportioning valve" aren't unheard of.
- These cars did tend to have very good isolation of all of the vibration load paths at a time when this was not routine. The multi-link suspension on W124s, typically meant that vibration had to pass through at least three rubber isolating bushes in series on its path from the wheel to the body, each pass through an isolator providing some attenuation.
----
On a less engineering note, W123s can hide a LOT of rust, and they're definitely old enough now to be the preserve of the more deviant motorist.
To run any older Merc, IMO, you need to be either rich, or resourceful. All older cars throw up faults, and with these, some of those faults can be rather expensive. Had I not done the work myself, my W124 would probably long since have been crushed, or used in scrappage.
In their defence though, it's difficult to imagine a car so complex that is so easy to work on, and in that respect, these cars earn my respect as being generally very well thought out.
** guilty as charged!
|
|
|
|
