1972 Mercedes-Benz W115 Reviews

1972 Mercedes-Benz W115 220D 2.4 diesel from Sweden

Year of manufacture1972
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 2.4 diesel Manual
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.8 / 10
Distance when acquired600000 kilometres
Most recent distance600000 kilometres
Previous carVolvo 244

Summary:

Good looking oldtimer!

Faults:

A lot of things were wrong with this car when I first bought it, it had been standing still in a carport for over 10 years.

After changing oil and fuel it did actually start at once, but only running on 3 out of 4 cylinders. At high RPMs the last cylinder (cyl# 1) starts working.

There a bit of rust, but I've fixed most of it this summer.

The foot button to active the windshield sprayer was totally stuck so I replaced it.

The heating fan was broken and had to be replaced (this was no fun, we basically stripped down the whole car to get to the fan). Its regulator was broken as well.

The plastic housing around the engine broke just a couple of weeks ago. I've seen more W115s with this problem.

The fuel line had a small hole due to a lack of mud flaps.. Also a common problem, can't understand why MB puts a fuel line so close behind the front tires.

The start motor is kinda broken as well, but sometimes it works so I'm not going to change it until I get the new engine running.

The seats are in bad shape (worn) but with some new covers they'll be like new again..

The speedometer is broken as well as in it shows the speed, but doesn't count any km/miles. Sometimes it does, but usually it doesn't.

The clock is broken as well.

General Comments:

Compared to my Volvo 244DL (1974) this car is extremely comfortable! No racing monster, but comfortable.

My girlfriend always want to have it cold and I like it warm so the double heating system is perfect.

The engine is still going on 3 cylinders at this moment, but it's going to be changed soon to a 240D 3,0 engine for some more power :)

I also bought a new generator that will be put in together with the new engine. 35A is just not enough.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 11th October, 2003

15th Dec 2003, 10:44

The 3.0 unit is heavy and not as reliable. I suggest staying with the original engine, as you will have fewer problems in the long run.

29th Dec 2003, 07:40

Try to get a newer one, from a W123. They have most of the problems fixed. It was just the early 240D 3.0 units that was bad... The newer 300D is OK.

/Mattias, another Swede.

1972 Mercedes-Benz W115 220d 2.2 diesel from North America

Year of manufacture1972
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 2.2 diesel Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.4 / 10
Distance when acquired318000 miles
Most recent distance321000 miles
Previous carMercedes-Benz W115

Summary:

If you know about it, the you will love it

Faults:

When I acquired the car it needed a new fuel injection pump diaphragm. this took a while to replace, but after that with some new belts and hoses, all was fine.

Brake booster began to die at 320,000.

Other than that its been great!

It did need a lot of body work... but it got done. rust wasn't too bad.

General Comments:

A 1972 220d isn't a rare car. I bought it at a body shop for $300. the owner insisted the motor was blown. the day I trailered the car home, it started up perfectly, albeit a lack of oil. I did sell it, but the present owner does not seem to appreciate her car to the fullest and it may return to me in time. I drove it around too. its alternator is weak, but that doesn't cause many problems. A/C system needs finishing.

This car will be good for many, many more miles. it is not a bad 220d at all.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 19th January, 2003

Average review marks: 7.1 / 10, based on 2 reviews