I recently got to share a lovely, 69,000-mile 1980 Mercedes 450SL with you, so today’s feature car has me feeling like I’m on the low-mileage Mercedes beat—and this one’s even more of a doozy than the SL! Few cars are as legendary for their longevity as Mercedes-Benz diesels, so this 300D, which has averaged just 743 miles per year over its thirty-five year service life, is just getting started. If you find yourself in need of a car that will outlive you, me, and the post-apocalyptic cockroaches, head here to eBay to check out this Orlando-based nearly-new stunner—and its equally stunning $29,900 asking price.
That price may be all the money (and then some) for a W123-chassis Mercedes sedan today, but the cult of these cars is only growing as they get older, and seemingly grow stronger with age. Aside from the super low miles, this example also sports a couple of desirable, fairly uncommon options, including a genuine leather interior and an electric sunroof.
The leather may not be quite as durable as the more common MB Tex vinyl—seriously, you can’t kill that stuff—but it shows no more wear than you’d expect for a 26,000-mile car, and is bolstered by clean carpets, glossy wood, a crack-free dash, and a blemish-free headliner. All is not perfect, however, as the door panels show the beginnings of the typical glue separation and the seatback net pockets are predictably droopy.
All the same, it’s a lovely cabin, and a beautiful color combo with the immaculate Lapis Blue metallic exterior. The bundt-style alloy wheels are clean and lustrous, and the overall effect is utterly classy. The only off notes might be the chrome wheel arch trims and door edge guards. The wheel arch trims in particular are notorious for hiding unpleasant, rusty surprises; as long as that’s not the case here, it’s purely a question of aesthetics, in which case I’d just as soon they weren’t there, personally. But then, I’m not the one (theoretically) ponying up nearly thirty grand.
One desirable option this sedan doesn’t have is a third pedal, for the simple reason that one wasn’t offered with this engine in the U.S. Still, a turbocharger means that this five-cylinder will be a good deal sprightlier than its diesel reputation would suggest, even with a slushbox. Its 123-horsepower rating nearly doubles that of its four-cylinder 240D sibling (67 horsepower, from a 1983 automobile that cost $22,470 new!). The 300D also offered better EPA-rated gas mileage than the poor, overmatched 240D when new. This example presumably hasn’t undergone the biodiesel/waste vegetable oil (WVO) conversion so popular in my crunchy neck of the woods, but it certainly looks well presented.
Well-presented is about how you could sum up this car, and at the price it had better be. I just hope it has been just as well maintained up to this point, not always a guarantee even with low mileage. If it has, it’s a pretty great starting point for some long-distance adventures—if you can swing the price. But then, isn’t that true of any Mercedes?
Not falling for it. Those seats look like way more than 26k butt-miles.
Thank you! Came here to say that. Either the seat’s been swapped, they were storing bowling balls there, or they missed a crucial step in their otherwise excellent restoration.
Maybe an overweight owner? Still, only 1 seat looks used.
126k miles, probably
These cars do not like to sit. Miles of vacuum tubing, hygroscopic fuel that breeds algae, etc. I’d MUCH rather have one with 200k honest miles and a folder full of service records.
It takes less than five minutes to swap the instrument cluster in one of these. Also, the little plastic gears in the odometer are very fragile, so a true odometer reading is harder to find than you’d think.
Ditto, diesels and sitting don’t go well together, just ask anyone with an auxiliary sailboat who didn’t maintain their tanks and fuel system.
The first one I’ve seen in a color other than Beruit Taxi Beige. Nice.
Buy this or a fully-loaded Camry for about the same price? I know what I’d rather drive.
But then again, there is no car more expensive than a (relatively) cheap old Mercedes…
Not many Camrys on BF..
And I’m glad for it.
luv the 123!
Auto trans is OK…
Just wish it wuz the TD & wagon…
Thanx Nathan, found a great 1.
Without the turbo these Mercedes diesels could barely get out of their own way accelerating to get on a crowded freeway.
That said, if the claimed mileage is true it’s probably not a bad buy.
Had one in the early 90’s, in Beirut taxi beige. Impressed my girlfriend enough that she married me. In a drag race (without a turbo), couldn’t beat a 36HP VW bus dragging another bus behind it. Slow to the point of dangerous getting onto expressways. In every other way, a superior car.
I had both a 77 300d auto and an 81 240d stick. The stick felt like it gave me at least a chance pulling into traffic. Very hard to find certain parts as the junkyard was filled with rear ended examples of those less fortunate.
Fairly good cars overall. Some camshaft problems with them. Also saw a lot of harmonic balancers come loose and allow the timing sprocket to rock back and forth on the key. Had some keyways reclaimed. Not cheap but worked fine afterwards….
Having driven diesels and made the mistake of buying one long ago there is no way I’ll ever own another one of those smelly smudge pots.
Normally I would say “LS SWAP”…, but today…”Duramax swap”. LOL
I’ve had six and they’ve been the most reliable cars. And I love an old diesel. This looks super nice but some things don’t add up. The wood pieces do not match. The center console (where the shifter, window switches, are etc ) is a different color than the upper wood inserts. It looks like a replacement piece. The carpets are faded in spots. And the seats do look like they’ve been refurbished.
Nathan! Just a comment, I strongly believe that this is a SD,not just a D! I believe this because it is just like mine except I have gray interior! I also have the 5 speed! Anyways if I am wrong then correct me! The only difference is that the SD signifies that it’s a turbo!
This is just a w123 300D Turbo. The “SD” is for the large sedans. During the w123 run those were the w116 and w126 which were known as 300SD and later sometimes in a larger version known as the 300SDL.
While the factory never used the term “DT”, some have called these the “300DT” as it technically is a 123 chassis 300D, but with the addition of the turbocharger to differentiate it from the earlier cars also called “300D” without a turbocharger.
To make matters more confusing, MB manufactured their wagon version as the “300TD”, but the “T” did not signify “Turbo”. Instead, it stood for “Touristik” or transport. “300SD” always referred to the larger “S” class with a turbodiesel which was available in 116 & 126 chassis.
I would request documentation on the miles.
These cars are known for having problems with the odometers.
I can’t tell you how many of these cars I have seen with the odometers not working. It was a lot.
more like 260,000 which would be normal for a Benz diesel.
This W123 has the very rare leather interior. It would not look this good at 126k miles. Unfortunately Carfax doesn’t give any info about mileage either. The seller would have to come up with some solid paperwork to prove the miles.
P. S. It would look 100 times better without these gaudy wheel well chrome disasters.