Kaleb, I would get the diesel. If you can find one with a documented factory crate motor, great - they are out there, just not easy to locate. Otherwise, get one that runs good and doesn't use oil. Tear the engine down and replace the rods BEFORE they bend and destroy the cylinder walls. Yeah, it will cost you $1k for new rods up front (plus gaskets and labor time), but the engine should last as long as any other 603 diesel afterwards - assuming the cylinders are still nice and round. The other advantage is, since you have to disassemble most of the engine anyway, you can replace ALL external seals and get a 100% leak-free motor.
If you go for the gasser, the 500 is the only one to consider. The 320 is too gutless, and why bother with the 420 when the 500 will be identical in maintenance cost (same M119 engine) but offer an extra 40 ponies on demand, with very little loss in MPG. Forget the 600 for obvious reasons. My sister picked up a very nice 1994 S500 recently and they really like it. Fuel economy is rather poor, figure 13-15 around town (depending on the weight of your foot), and 18-22 on the freeway. Later cars (1996-up?) got the M119.98x engine with distributorless ignition (very cool), as well as the 5-speed automatic tranny. The S500 is surprisingly quick for such a large car. If you lack restraint, a Valentine-1 is a wise accessory to purchase. (Trust me.) Some day I wouldn't mind getting a W140 myself, and it would either be the S350 (with an intercooler, and the full-load screw tweaked, buwaaa-hah-hahaha!) or the S500. Such a shame we never got the 180hp S300 with the turbo 606 motor over here. I'd be all over one of those! :-) -Dave M. > ------------------------------ > Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 08:46:52 -0600 > From: "Kaleb C. Striplin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [MBZ] anybody with a 603 3.5? > > How many folks here have a 3.5 in a 140, well, or a 126? Bent rods? > Thinking about looking for another 140 in the near future and am really > concidering a 3.5 and risking the rods bending. If not that I would > either go with the next economical choice of a 320 with the 104 or most > likely all out with a 500. Anybody got a 500 and if so what sort of > mileage do you get? Probably better off going this route over the > diesel anyways. > -- > Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK
