Very well put Dan. I have both and feel the same way. Though I am
looking for a late 80's SDL as my permanent road car. The CD is a thril
to drive, and I'll never NOT own one.
On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:06:44 -0600, Dan Weeks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Go with a CD.........
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 10:48:16 -0600, OK Don <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Of course, a 617.952 in a 123.133 chassis (3515lb) ought to be faster
than a 617.951 in a 126.120 chassis (3625lb), if it's raw acceleration
you're after. Then the 240D can be used for chassis parts.
I prefer the 126 over the 123 though --- -- -
I'd heard things about SDs being slower than Ds being slower than
CDs, but the weights of the cars are not a whole lot different.
Although I could get away with using a coupe most of the time, I've
found I really appreciate the cavernous trunk and
stretch-out-in-the-back-seat passenger room of the SD rather
frequently, not to mention all the other chassis and interior
amenities and the bigger brakes. I find SD performance and handling
surprisingly good--it's a very well-balanced car that can be pushed
very hard, on rough, twisting roads, with confidence and comfort. For
autocrossing, you'd probably be a bit ahead with a CD. For real-life
use and road driving, though, I've found the SD to be very
satisfying--Especially since you can generally pick up one for
CHEAPER than a coupe, all else being equal.
--
Luther KB5QHU
Alma, Ark
'83 300SD (happily running WVO/diesel mix)
'82 300CD (Slate grey, black MBTex, WVO/D mix)
'82 300D '90 300E (both parts or can run??)
