By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
-Jason
Any advice as to which engine and/or transmission is best, and which to avoid (there are the caburated six, the FI six, 3.5 and 4.5 V8s, IIRC)? Same with options--should I avoid things like power windows and locks? These cars are interesting, so many engines, some have power options, some do not, some have floor shift, some column, there are a few four-speeds peppered among a majority of automatics, etc.
I can't afford a trailer queen, but I would like one as a respectable, occasional driver (I would not subject myself nor the car to driving it year-round driving in Chicago).
Having weeded out those categories, this gives us "clean daily drivers" which are not perfect but are very respectable cars with documented service records. Among those, the 4-doors are the better deal by far, although not as attractive as the coupes. The convertibles are way too pricey.
These cars are very nice drivers and can be quite reliable, although they are a bit fussy. The a/c is a joke, as are the factory radios, so don't count on either of those to do much more than take up space. Transmissions are hard-shifting automatics or standard shifts with shifters that feel connected to the transmission by clothesline and duct tape. But you can get used to that. These are certainly not sports cars.
I agree, $5-6K is plenty to pay for one. They are not classics probably never will be, although the V8 convertibles may have a shot some long time down the road. I think that about a 71-72 injected 6 cylinder coupe would be sweet, but they are pricier than the 4-doors by a good margin. So if you want to pay way more for fewer doors, that's the price of the ticket.
However, as big and clumsy and clunky as the 164 is, they will stagger around for quite a long time if you can tolerate the torture of driving one. Think of them as a slow, 4-door Swedish truck or a Hippo in ballet shoes. Think of a lazy little 6 cylinder engine hooked up to a rock crusher transmission and placed inside a Buick with armor plating and bio-degradable upholstery.
Still, if you wanted a kick around car for cheap, you could do worse. They are tough if you can keep that early electronic injection (similar to VW Squarebacks) going.
I thought the Volvo 164 was the car that went over 2 million miles...you know, that world record...
The million mile car is a P1800. Different engine, trans, body, chassis etc.
The Volvo 164 was built as the "big" Volvo, to compete with Mercedes and BMW. Only in their dreams.
I have to say that the car is no worse than any American car in terms of handling at the time. I took this car cross-country 3 times and it was actually very pleasant to drive.
While my Focus is nearly the best FWD handler out there in terms of new cars, it just doesn't evoke as many fond memories as my Volvo 240.
Why? I personally think some people like cars BETTER that have boundaries to work around. I loved my Volvo 240, if not despite the fact that it handled like a brick, was very slow. It was so reliable that it ran on a skipped transmission for several thousand miles with no complaint, and you could throw battery acid in the engine and it would still be okay.
Same thing about Mercedes 300D's. They're slow, unrefined and persnickety, but you feel worth something when the engine finally spools up after you've let the glow plug warm up.
I once test drove an 850 turbo wagon and the torque steer/turbo lag was maddening. But it was a fun ride, and half the reason i wanted the car was so that I could figure out how to go fast without steering myself off the road.
Does this make sense to anyone? I think this is why people like quirky cars. They like to be told "no" or "yes" by their automobiles.
I know I'm probably not going to find a *completely* rust-free car for a reasonable price (unless I go to CA or AZ, where they do seem plentiful and cheap). Are there any typically rust-prone areas on these cars?
I think the 300SEL might have had air suspension,,,yep, I just found it. It did.
Actually, if you are content with a 280SE sedan, you should be able to pick up a very clean one dirt cheap. These cars are practically give-aways. Since the cost of restoration vastly exceeds these cars' value, they will be scrapped as they break down. And since they are not being restored, the value of the nice ones continues to drop because there is no enthusiasts base. So it's a buyer's market on 60s era MB sedans.
A 280SEC (coupe) is still affordable unless you want the 3.5 V8, then it gets pricey.
If you want a coupe, a rather unpopular and hard to sell model is the 250C 2.5. You can buy these very reasonably. around $4K-5K for a clean one.
Pay notattention to asking prices. If the seller is asking a high price, they will never, ever sell a 4-door sedan or 250C for any kind of money. Maybe a 280SEC that was very sharp can command a decent price (12K?).
Yes, the 164 had two more cylinders, heavier duty transmission, etc. Mechanically, these cars were very sturdy. I don't think the 164 would have any problems lasting as long as a 1800.
Almost all engine internal parts are interchangable between the B20/ B30. Naturally, not the crank and cam shafts, but components such as oil pumps, pistons and valves are.
I think the low value of the 164 today speaks for the public's and technician's general opinion of it, but of course there's always someone who likes the orphan cars.
Let's just say that taken in its totality as a car, the 164 was rather ill-conceived in its marketplace niche. Perhaps my own bad experiences further color my prejudices against it as a clumsy and ugly thing compared to a Mercedes. As for its reliability, I'll leave that for others to judge.
What I really wanted to say was not about 164 transmissions but rather that the 164 was not comparable to the cars it was intended to compete with, BMW and Benz. It failed completely in the marketplace because it was readily apparent to buyers which car was the better.
Really handsome car,but those colors...
Pontiac called it Iris Mist and I forget what Chevy called it. I remember an Iris Mist '65 GTO convertible, mint and with all the options, that my GTO buddies were oohing and aahing about, and I felt like the kid in "The Emperor's New Clothes"--hey, doesn't anyone realize that car is lavender?!
Anyone remember the name of that metallic greenish/aqua that GM sold in 1965-66 only? There were lots of Impalas and Catalinas running around with this color especially, it was quite popular.
On the other arm of the scale, what is to make of Rolls-Royces/Bentleys of the same era? I hardly ever see these barges on the road anymore.
So I'd say yes, find these cars in good shape, enjoy them and when they break in a serious manner, just dispose of them. They won't ever be worth anything more than they are now.
This is probably a $9,000 car in good running shape with these high miles, so there's only $7,500 worth of room to fix it up---and that $7,500 can disappear pretty fast on a V-12 BMW.
If you want a working A/C, electrical system, and a car that doesn't overheat, maybe, but if you want to 'clunk' around, there are plenty of old Benzes that won't require so much TLC.
Or maybe the valves for that bank were out of sync with the pistons? Is there a seperate chain for that cam? Maybe a bad cam?
Years ago I had a mystery bad cylinder that turned out to be a distorted intake manifold gasket that was causing a vacuum leak in the runner to that cylinder. Apparently it came that way from the factory, since I bought the car from the original owner and he claimed to have never had the manifold off. Hard to believe.
That's a good one. Too bad there aren't forensic mechanics. BTW I'm an entirely self-taught mechanic...you'd never guess ;-).
I see those suckers sell at auction for like $4-6K wholesale for nice, low-milers....
Be careful here buddy.... 200K its not worth close to $3500 wholesale...
Bill
This dealer has quite a few German cars in "Death Row". That's what I call the back row of cars that are too expensive to fix and just too nice to throw away. So they sit there. Also a Q45 on its 5th transmission. Way to go!
On the other hand, I bet that dealer you were talking about would love to work on Irv Gordon's 2-mil. mile Volvo. I bet old P1800s are extremely simple to repair and service!
As you may know I have a 92 190E 2.6. What do you think about me trading it in for a 300TE from the same era, or possibly an E320 wagon from the pre-big-butt-hump-circle-headlamps days?
I really want a wagon for the versatility.
Volvo P1800 is relatively simple to work on but the overdrive is a bear to get right. Generally the P1800 is a sturdy, dull car, typical old Volvo.
I dunno what's with the Q45. These are nice old cars, but they are complex and not cheap to fix. Some people think of them as a Benz alternative but they are often shocked to see their maintenance bills. (the later Q45s are not as much fun to drive but they are better cars I think).
BMW750 IL -- Anytime you are dealing with a V-12, be it BMW or Jaguar, you have to be prepared to take the "big hit". They are complex engines hooked up to complex systems, and there is really nothing worse than old & complex technology.
Now I wanna know what you have against it! LOL