Grudge Match: Volvo 240 vs Mercedes W124

[analog]

It's more of a Top Gear cast off. Some of the presenters were presenters of Top Gear in the past, and it's created in the style of the previous format of Top Gear. Top Gear has been going since 1977 but only been in it's current studio based format since 2002.

Yes, Top Gear was canned some years ago ( hard to fathom now ) by the BBC and some presenters were hired by a rival TV-station to present 5th Gear, shortly after Top Gear was reinstated as a different format and evolved into what it is now.

 

[sennarose88]

Vote for Volvo, because my father had a 144. Such a great car, at least they share the same body.

 

[YSSMAN]

You have to be crazy to pick the Volvo, my buddy is a Mercedes machanic and he's told me that Mercedes are built like race cars. My other friend owns a dealership and the stuf thay have built on the side are just crazy. Volvos just plane suk

You must not be too familiar with the (older) Volvos then... Back in the day, both Volvo and Saab were off their respective rockers and built some impossibly insane machinery. Both the Mercedes and the Volvo will likely be the only vehicles to survive the Apocalypse, but I'd have the Volvo in the end. There is something about that squared-off face that makes my heart melt.

 

[Greycap]

You have to be crazy to pick the Volvo, my buddy is a Mercedes machanic and he's told me that Mercedes are built like race cars. My other friend owns a dealership and the stuf thay have built on the side are just crazy. Volvos just plane suk

Speaking of being built like race cars...

An engine with internals good for 350+ bhp full stock.
A transmission good for 500+ Nm.
A differential that keeps going when that transmission fails.
McPherson front struts.
Stabilizer bars both front and rear.
Four wheel disc brakes.
For those brakes, four piston front calipers with ventilated discs. Two piston calipers in the rear.
A weight distribution between 55/45 and 49/51.

All that in a family car nearly nobody associates with performance, yep, that's the run of the mill 240 designed in the early seventies. Got to agree with YSSMAN here.

 

[Jim Prower]

I'd rock it. A little low, nice wheels, not too much of either...

Or, just to be completely Necking Futs, That bodystyle, with this front clip...and setup.

 

[YSSMAN]

Generally speaking, I can't wait until the 240 shows up in Forza. Well, the 242 anyway. Drive the wheels off that car any way you like, its guaranteed to be a blast.

 

[TS]

They're both good cars.

240s are fun to drive, very safe and cheap to maintain/modify

W124 is as safe as the Volvo, it's more luxurious than top line 240s, and are nice to ride in. Parts/maintanence can add up quickly though.

With that said, I would take the 240, you can get one for pocket change on the west coast. And you can take different directions with it, fix it up and keep it stock for daily driving or turbocharge it, do suspension work and have a pretty spirited dd for some weekend track use.

 

[Aero2000]

GTP Grudge Match - Invincibility Round
Volvo 240 vs Mercedes-Benz W124

Long ago, in a distant place called 'Europe' there was a time in which cars were built to last. Engineers held sway over designers, cars were driven hard, and even while being driven to pieces, the vehicles never complained. Out of the madness that was the malaise era, two champions of durability and outright madness appeared: The Volvo 240 and the Mercedes-Benz W124 (E-Class). These vehicles, how similar they are, and yet completely different. Both have stood the test of time with their timeless looks, unbeatable mechanical superiority, and massive fan bases. You want a car with 200,000 miles on the clock and still has the ability to do another 200K or more? Screw the Toyota Camry, these are your options.

Choose wisely, defend your position.

I had take the Mercedes it's more fun to drive I think and it look better. 240 is a nice car but it's very boring to drive without the Turbo...

 

[eiriksmil]

The W124 is complex but never fails because it's a very well engineered car. The 240 never fails either, but that is because it's way simpler (the same reason why a Toyota Corolla will never fail). Look at the bay of the Volvo compared to the Benz and you see what I mean. That the W124 is as reliable as the 240, with all it's electricity (I had auto windows, auto sunroof, warning light for screen wash, coolant, grinding brake pads, etc) and more advanced mechanics gives it the victory in my opinion. Cause when viewed objectively, it's a much better car

Having said that, I think the W123 is even more bulletproof like other people have said, because of less electronics that one day can fail Oh, and it's the W124 that was the last over-engineered Benz, not the 123.

I've owned a 124, I'll own one again; the same way I'll one day own a 242..

 

[neanderthal]

I would argue that the R129 (1990- 2001 300/ 400/ 500/ 600SL) was the last of the over engineered Mercedes.


And being that they are heavily based on the W124.

 

[Slicks]

Bit of a toss up, for me.

The Volvo is simpler and cheaper to fix. Both cars have similar longevity. Volvo would typically get better economy. But I've seen more rusty 240s than I have w124s.

The Merc is more complex. Harder to fix, and more expensive to fix when it does break. But with that complexity, you get luxury, great ride quality, some speed (in 420 and 500 forms) without the complexity of the Volvo's turbo. It looks modern(ish).

Plus, and this is both last and least, you get to say that you drive a Mercedes.


I'll take the Merc.
It's notable that I spent over a year on-and-off driving my dad's w126 300SD. Bank vaults are built like old Mercedes'. I'm biased.

 

[pdqsailor]

I love this grudge match - why? I own both a 1987 Mercedes 300E and a 1990 Volvo 240 - I can't loose. Now as to which car is more durable? No contest the Mercedes but it is not a fair comparison. The Mercedes had a list price of $65k in Canada - the volvo was half that much. The Volvo is the cheapest million mile car ever produced - the Mercedes - the best.

I drive the Mercedes EVERY SINGLE day including family treks to Florida every year. This car is bulletproof - no rust - NONE. The volvo has some rust on it - though not much. Mechanically the Mercedes is tough as nails and reliable plus the parts are cheap - particularly on line and the fuel economy is very good for a car of this size and weight plus it goes like a bat out of heck - The sweet spot is 80 mph - the car simply massages your back at this speed. There is also the matter of the steering geometry - particularly when parking which is superlative as is the turning radius. Build quality is superb and structural integrity is amazing - it is the BEST car ever made - 24 years old and entirely relevant and useful EVERY SINGLE DAY. I LOVE THIS CAR.

 

[Timon]

Honestly speaking I have had a chance to sample both 240 Volvo and Mercedes w124 both manufactured during the 1980's. It all depends on taste and preference and needs of an individual. For safety Volvo definitely ranks slightly higher. For durability both rank the same. For speed both rank the same. For pick up speed the Mercedes w124 ranks slightly higher since they are lighter in weight than the Volvo. Volvo is slightly more roomy on the inside cabin than the Mercedes w124 hence my choice for Volvo. Though the Volvo is rather flat in terms of the interior beauty as compared to the Mercedes. I would go for Volvo due to safety. The country i stay in most highways for now average speed is 100km/hour so. I rather have the unique brick for its unique looks.