Author Topic: Are W126's better than W116's?  (Read 15181 times)

AMG69

  • Classic
  • **
  • Posts: 485
  • AMG
  • Location: Lying back on the couch dreaming about the old 6.9!
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #15 on: 21 December 2006, 03:12 AM »
I recently had my 6.9 at an indicated 240kmhr....assuming the speedo is slightly out it is reasonable to assume it was doing at least 230kmhr.  It had nothing left - but it was rock solid.  Oh, the fuel gauge moves pretty quickly at that speed!
sigh....sitting back contemplating the next purchase..!

carl888

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 715
  • Location: Melbourne
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #16 on: 21 December 2006, 04:51 AM »
An Australian 560 SEL with 248 BHP will do 0-100 in 7.1 and reach 238 km/h, the 296 BHP Leaded Euro version does 0-100 in 6.6 and does 246 km/h.  No 6.9 Euro or otherwise will get near one I'm sorry guys.


6.9's when new were road tested to 150mph, thats 240kmh,

The factory 0-60 time was 7.5, much like the top speed I would say this is also under rated.

Fuel consumption isn't an issue, well it shouldn't be with a luxury car, if it is you have the wrong car.



Des, I'm sorry, this is just plain wrong, no 6.9 has ever been offically timed at 150 mph.  The fastest time ever recorded for a 6.9 AFAIK was the European test that Paul Frere did at 236 km/h I believe. 

Regards,

Carl.



carl888

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 715
  • Location: Melbourne
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #17 on: 21 December 2006, 04:58 AM »
Well I guess I am one of the un-informed!! So be it!!
When I began looking for a Benz, of this style, 6 years ago I looked first at the 126 in various guises and was impressed by the smoothness of power delivery and ride comfort. I looked for the best available examples and found some that were certainly concourse condition. Build quality was excellent and appointments were certainly up to contemporary expectations. However, what was missing was the mechanical feel and affiliation with road sense that I like. I found it with the 116. Clearly the 116 is a ground-breaker in terms of safety and handling in a car so large and refinements came with each successive 126 model, but, in my humble opinion, at the expense of the driver's engagement with the car as a mechanism. Yes, the 116 steering is a little more hard work on a twisting hairpin road than is a 126 but equally it can be more sensitively Brian Crump

I think that's a good way of putting it Brian, the 116 certianly feels more "Earthy" than the 126, you really feel connected to the road a bit more.  Maybe in refining the 126 there just a bit more rubber between the road and the seat!  I really like the design of the 116 centre console, I can't think of any car today that you could operate the ventilation controls without taking your eyes off the road, imagine what the 116 must have felt like when it was new 35 years ago. 

Regards,

Carl.


bahnstormer109

  • Classic
  • **
  • Posts: 177
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #18 on: 23 December 2006, 02:50 AM »
as a 116 owner, i really only like the 126 for the ABS brakes, and those hot little puddle lights in the bottoms of the doors!

oh, and power seats are cool too, but thats just the 'options' junkie in me talking.

cheers,
Paolo.
Paolo,
Brisbane, Australia.

72 300SEL 3.5
84 280CE
86 560SEL
86 230TE

Des

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 923
  • Location: Australia
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #19 on: 28 December 2006, 03:20 PM »
Des, I'm sorry, this is just plain wrong, no 6.9 has ever been offically timed at 150 mph.  The fastest time ever recorded for a 6.9 AFAIK was the European test that Paul Frere did at 236 km/h I believe. 

Regards,

Carl.


Hi Carl
I found the reference I was vaugely referring to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_450SEL_6.9

scroll down to the heading:

Autobahn cruiser versus race track

Quote
Top speed was factory-rated at 140 mph (225 km/h), but some journalists testing the car saw speeds approaching 150 mph (241 km/h). Among those journalists was Brock Yates.
1977 W123 230 
1977 W116 280S *new*
1980 W123 250
VW Beetle "Oval Window"
VW Golf Mk1
Volvo 240GL
Volvo 740GLE

AMG69

  • Classic
  • **
  • Posts: 485
  • AMG
  • Location: Lying back on the couch dreaming about the old 6.9!
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #20 on: 28 December 2006, 03:37 PM »
still reckon mine was doing at least 230kmhr - on a dead straight road with no wind....(indicated 240 but I suspect speedo is "out"; one day I'll invest in a GPS and then there will be no arguments about speed!
sigh....sitting back contemplating the next purchase..!

oscar

  • W116 Addict
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,043
  • Location: Riverina, NSW, AUSTRALIA
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #21 on: 28 December 2006, 05:59 PM »
one day I'll invest in a GPS and then there will be no arguments about speed!

Can't your other half "borrow" a radar gun?  Alternatively, drive past one on the highway and see how the courts determine how accurate your speedo is. ;D
1973 350SE, my first & fave

Des

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 923
  • Location: Australia
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #22 on: 29 December 2006, 01:38 PM »
found this on the web, pity it doesn't show the tacho, 6.9 at 249k's

1977 W123 230 
1977 W116 280S *new*
1980 W123 250
VW Beetle "Oval Window"
VW Golf Mk1
Volvo 240GL
Volvo 740GLE

oscar

  • W116 Addict
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,043
  • Location: Riverina, NSW, AUSTRALIA
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #23 on: 29 December 2006, 02:13 PM »
I swear, even with a 1/1000th of a second exposure you can see that fuel guage falling :D

Good find Des!  Hypothetically, if we're to be sceptical and say there's a discrepancy in accuracy, by what percentage, or what would the true speed be? 

I'm going to say it's under estimating true speed and it's doing 250. ;D
1973 350SE, my first & fave

Des

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 923
  • Location: Australia
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #24 on: 29 December 2006, 02:20 PM »
i used to own a GPS device and when fitted to my w123 230 with correct tyres the speedometer would read 10% higher than what you were actually doing, keep you from getting a ticket

if it said 60k's you were doing low 50k's compared to what the GPS tracker said you were doing

never tried it in my 6.9 though
1977 W123 230 
1977 W116 280S *new*
1980 W123 250
VW Beetle "Oval Window"
VW Golf Mk1
Volvo 240GL
Volvo 740GLE

behrthermostat

  • Enthusiast
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Location: Arlington, MA U.S.A.
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #25 on: 29 December 2006, 06:19 PM »
What I find cute about the 126 are the options for the rear passengers - reclining rear seat, electric-powered rear sunshades, and of course, rear a/c ducts.

But the 116 feels more like a tank than the 126 (re: STEEL bumpers).
1961 180D (W120)
1974 450SEL (W116, of course)
1991 190E (W201)

carl888

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 715
  • Location: Melbourne
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #26 on: 30 December 2006, 01:15 AM »
found this on the web, pity it doesn't show the tacho, 6.9 at 249k's



Hi Des,

A great pic.  I have a question though.  I thought the first gear maximum mark on the speedo for 6.9's was at about 108 km/h, whereas in that pic it's about 95 (Where a 450 is) but the speedo is calibrated to 260, what gives???

From what I can tell, a 6.9 should do exactly 237 km/h flat out, that's the rev limited top speed of the engine.  If we assume that the speedo is about 6% optimistic (Which in my experience seems to be on the mark) the speedo should indicate about 250.

Regards,

Carl.


Des

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 923
  • Location: Australia
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #27 on: 30 December 2006, 01:23 AM »
Good point about the shift points, I didn't even realize till someone on here the other day mentioned what they were for, I had some vague notion that they were to do with speed limits in certain areas, so you would hold your car at the speed.

this is my speedometer which as you say has the higher shifting marks

1977 W123 230 
1977 W116 280S *new*
1980 W123 250
VW Beetle "Oval Window"
VW Golf Mk1
Volvo 240GL
Volvo 740GLE

robertd

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 624
  • Classic Chrome
  • Location: Bellarine Peninsula Victoria Australia
    • SIVLER OVER BLUE
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #28 on: 30 December 2006, 02:10 PM »
Hi guys,
I have previously posted information that I think answers this question.
The two 6.9's I own have the following speedo/tacho combinations
 1977 Euro (High compression engine) gear markings 95,150. Redline 5000
 1979 Oz    ( with anti pollution crap)     "      "        105,170.    "       5300
I read somewhere that to compensate for the lose of power on engines with the anti-pollution gear, the engines were tuned to produce their peak power at higher revs.
This would explain the anomoly.
Regards Robert
 
116   1978 450SEL 6.9 #  4848
116   1979 450SEL  6.9 # 5884
116   1979 450SEL  6.9 # 6225  SOLD
116   1978 450SEL  6.9 # 5128  SOLD
116   1979 450SEL  6.9 # 5884  SOLD
116   1974 450SEL  DJet

Mforcer

  • Vintage
  • ***
  • Posts: 973
  • Freedom Fighter
  • Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Are W126's better than W116's?
« Reply #29 on: 31 December 2006, 03:32 PM »
still reckon mine was doing at least 230kmhr - on a dead straight road with no wind....(indicated 240 but I suspect speedo is "out"; one day I'll invest in a GPS and then there will be no arguments about speed!

I tested my speedo recently with a GPS unit and found the GPS to indicate about 5-10% higher than my speedo was indicating and have also found the same in other, newer cars I have tested. I think my speedo is more accurate than the GPS.
Michael
1977 450SE [Brilliant Red]
2006 B200