News:

www.W116.org - All about the Car!

Main Menu

6.9 Driving Impressions

Started by TJ 450, 07 September 2012, 10:48 AM

TJ 450

Quote from: ZCarFan on 16 September 2012, 09:36 AM
I see the subject was come up again within this thread so I will ask a somewhat off topic question.  I've driven and owned a lot of cars over the years and anything from about 1960 up has proven capable of getting around safely at the speed limits on our roads here (U.S.) when properly maintained.  I admit, the W116 is superior to anything else I've driven from its era and is one of the reason I have one, but I've not had any problems with other models that would have been solved with a better car. 

The question then is, just how fast are you guys driving?  Even a late 60's Chevy Impala for extreme example (I had a '69) could navigate twisty backroads fast enough to get in serious legal trouble here, so I am a bit lost on the comments.  Once you've reached cornering speeds that send your passengers sliding across the seat into the door panel without strain from the car, how much more capacity is needed?  In the end, you will be going faster than your reaction times can cope with unexpected events regardless of equipment, particularly in traffic or on roads with blind curves .  It is a serious question as I really am baffled by this.

As a motorcyclist of 20 years, I hold the same opinion as Tony66_au that driver awareness is crucial to safety on the road.   Having a safe car is icing on the cake, but not getting in the accident incident in the first place is far better.

The fastest legal speed limit here is 110km/h. I think the crux of the matter is that Australian cars of the period were behind the times, and could be quite a handful. It would require a lot more skill to drive one fast than it would a 116. If it all went pear shaped, you'd very much rather be in the 116.

As far as forgetting how to actually deal with a car in adverse situations, defensive driving courses will help that, following that advanced driving courses.

I always take the mindset of "an accident will probably occur in a worst case scenario" every time I get in a car. I think everyone should be mindful of this, as it goes a long way towards being prepared for dealing with hazards, ensuring that you are engaging such practices as "looking ahead" as Tony mentioned and so on.

Tim
1976 450SEL 6.9 1432
1969 300SEL 6.3 1394
2003 ML500

JasonP


I've taken mine up to 80 mph, and it handled just fine. No wobble or vibration at all. I could have gone faster, but the speed limit was 70 mph.

I commute on a two-way highway for about 15 miles, and there are accidents on this stretch all the time, at least two or three deadly ones a year.

I always slow down to 50 at the top of hills and when going through intersections. And I always look far, far ahead of me. A few times people passing in the other lane could have led to a head-on, if I hadn't slowed down about 1/4 mile ahead of time. And people swerve as well, crossing the center line not only on curves, but on straight-aways too. I try to stay away from the center when oncoming traffic approaches. I am always surprised how close motorcyclists drive to the center line when passing oncoming traffic.

I guess the rule would be to expect others to cause a crash, and this makes one a "defensive" driver.

Just the other week, in the city,  a group of teenagers were at the corner, and ready to pull out into my lane while a huge pick-up was turning onto their road. If I had not slowed down to 10 mph, expecting them to pull out right in front of me, WHICH THEY DID, I probably would have killed the driver, as the speed limit for me was 35mph.

1979 300SD
Color: 623H "Light Ivory"
1979 300SD
Color: 861H "Silver Green Metallic"
1977 280 E
Color: 606G "Maple Yellow"
-------------------------------------------

s class

In South Africa :

Suburban roads are 60km/h
major roads in urban areas : 80km/h
Regional back roads : 100km/h
Highways (both dual and single carriageways), and better back roads : 120km/h

Add to that these limits are fairly loosly policed, and a tolerance of 10km/h over the limit is tolerated.

Most drivers would tend to travel about 10 to 20km/h over the posted limit.

Great country to drive in.  I pity those who have only experienced a W116 at 80mph/120km/h.  They only really come alive at 100mph plus. 


[color=blue]'76 6.9 Euro[/color], [color=red]'78 6.9 AMG[/color], '80 280SE, [color=brown]'74 350SE[/color], [color=black]'82 500SEL euro full hydro, '83 500SEL euro full hydro [/color], '81 500SL

jbrasile

Have done about 180-190 in the 450SEL and 230 in the 77 6.9 to give it a nice "shakedown" after the restoration... these cars are incredibly predictable and stable at those speeds,  the 6.9 from 160  to 200 feels like going from 0 to 30, simply astonishing.

Tks,

Joe


ZCarFan

I can say that the 2 W116 300SDs that I had were very nice over country roads.  Not necessarily huge amounts of grip on the smallish tires, but great turn-in and rather neutral steering response once it is "set".  My W126 280SE feels a bit more numb in comparison, though I understand the actual limits are higher.   I am getting closer to having the U.S. spec '78 280SE on the road and I imagine that will be a bit lighter on its feet than the Diesels.

In context of the 6.9 I'm trying to get an idea regarding how they drive compared to the more mundane coil spring models.  It messes with my mind a bit when 6.9 owners recall cars from the past that are "scary" as it's not fitting with my recollections.  So, it leaves me thinking the 6.9s suspension is either a revelation or maybe you guys are just hauling butt all the time ;)  If they really are that good, I might think harder the next time one comes up for sale.  I passed on the 6.9 that Casey found on Ebay, maybe I just need more convincing.  So... other than the obvious power advantage, are they that much better?

zook

i was amazed when i gave my 280S a good run, it handled far better than i would expect of such a big car..and really stable at high speeds up to 200. cant imagine what she'll be like when the repairs are done
[url=http://forum.w116.org/test-drive/1978-mercedes-benz-280s-'amg'-4spd-manual/]| '78 280S 'AMG' 4spd |[/url] [url=http://ozfoz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=34858]| my daily; '98 Subaru Forester |[/url]

jbrasile

ZCarFan,

It is hard to describe the different feel a 6.9 will give you. The power advantage makes the car respond "NOW"  to any gas pedal input while the hydro-pneumatic suspension gives you a very soft ride but at the same time makes the car extremely enjoyable at high speeds.

You would have to try one to understand, but if  you do, make sure it is well sorted example and not a run down 3k car, those are down right scary....

Tks,

Joe

Tony66_au

Zcarfan, my 1971 Chrysler Valiant is basically a 68 Dodge Dart or any A body Chrysler.

The speed and handling isn't an issue and as a car of the mid 60's to early 70's based entirely on an existing and proven US model it is a far nicer car to drive than the Ford and GM-Holden examples of the era.

Here's the kicker though, thin tyres and drum brakes have their limits as well as torsion bar front suspension means the car will not pull up well in the wet and is sub par in the dry although I drive it accordingly It still takes me a few miles to get used to it again.

The Highway i live on is heavily populated by Bikes and is used by visiting riders in their thousands when the Moto GP is on at Phillip Island as well as the other Bike races held at the circuit and at these times I used to be extra cautious.

Forward observation is all good and well but this time of year people will fill any gap you leave and place themselves and myself in situations where id rather have better brakes and handling lol

So far since Jan 1 I have had 6 near misses involving on coming traffic on corners and blind crests, 3 cars lose it overtaking in the wet and a few in the dry as well as being monstered by Semi trailers and B Doubles (A semi with 2 trailers) to the stage where I now drive day or night with my headlights on low beam.

I also had a nasty accident with my wife, baby daughter and oldest son when a young driver talking on her phone pulled into traffic and then stopped dead to turn right and I hit her rear corner at 80 Kph and this all occurred in literally a few seconds.

My time on Bikes is now over for this reason too.

Tony66_au

Heres the thing, My old Valiant was $2500.00 new in 1971.

The V8's (318 cubic inches) had solid front disks and thicker torsion bars but were still pretty basic.

From memory in 1973 a 280S was $22000.00 so a bit under 10 times the price of my Valiant and it shows BIG TIME lol.

I know its off topic a bit but heres a few pics of what my Val looks like, South Africa got these too and they are close to their US counterparts.



Aaaand heres the brake system......



My Ute and Sedan plus an Aussie Chrysler POS (Green one)


Tony66_au

Engine bay, Aussie designed 245 cube Six with 2 bbl carter.



Interior before I de - old folksed it, Note macrame steering wheel cover and seat covers lol




oversize

I didn't know Chrysler made tractors!!!  LOL!   ;)
1979 6.9 #5541 (Red Bull)
1978 6.9 #4248 (Skye)
1979 6.9 #3686 (Moby Dick)
1978 6.9 #1776 (Dora)
1977 450SEL #7010 white -P
1975 450SEL #8414 gold -P

TJ 450

Damn, that braking arrangement scares me. Still, it's a step up from the cable operated systems of prior years. 8)

Tim
1976 450SEL 6.9 1432
1969 300SEL 6.3 1394
2003 ML500

Tony66_au

Add a booster and set drum brakes up properly and its a good system, the cars are also fairly light at around 1100 kg and the addition of 6 inch wide rims and good tyres and V8 (Stiffer) torsion bars and anti roll bar on the rear and the car comes up to scratch.

Larger (11") Drums front and rear also make a big difference but the greatest issue is when the front drums get wet...........................

Once again you need to drive within the limits.

You want to know the scary thing?

The Fords and Holdens of the day were far far worse in brake and handling capabilities than the Chryslers but they also had half the power as well which was why Chrysler did so well in rural area's.

Even the Mighty 225 cubic inch Slant 6 fitted as standard from the late 50's to the late 60's was far above the power even in single barrel carb'd versions than the 148 cube and 170 cube holden and Ford family 6's and as a result their (Valiant) braking systems were also far better as were their handling.

My Ute has that system but with the optional power booster and its a far nicer drive and if I can source the bits I will be adding a booster to the sedan when i get around to restoing it eventually.

We really were way behind the rest of the world in this stuff when you compare say a HG holden to a Renault 10 which had full independent suspension and 4 wheel disks in the 60's and both cars were family cars in their respective countries...........

That said I love driving the Val's and really need to finish the work to get them back on the road again, especially the Ute being a 3 speed column shift.