Why haven't any vintage Mercedes diesel fans picked this up yet?

[atikovi]

https://newyork.craigslist.org/stn/cto/d/staten-island-1966-mercedes-benz-200d/7575663184.html

Looks pretty nice with a reasonable price. If I didn't have enough keepers, I'd have taken a ride up already.

 

[wag123]

Maybe because the car is not entertaining to drive, inexpensive to own, or beautiful to look at (IMO). With only 55 hp and 87 lb-ft on tap, the car does 0-60 in about 25 seconds, on-par with a VW Beetle 1200, in other words VERY slow. Additionally, they say that it has 27k miles on the rebuilt engine, but it doesn't mention how many miles are on the car itself. That engine was famously long-lived and durable, so the car itself might have 400k or more miles on it.

 

[bullwinkle]

Maybe because the car is not entertaining to drive, inexpensive to own, or beautiful to look at (IMO). With only 55 hp and 87 lb-ft on tap, the car does 0-60 in about 25 seconds, on-par with a VW Beetle 1200, in other words VERY slow. Additionally, they say that it has 27k miles on the rebuilt engine, but it doesn't mention how many miles are on the car itself. That engine was famously long-lived and durable, so the car itself might have 400k or more miles on it.

As a not-so proud former driver of a ‘64 Beetle, 1200 cc, 40 HP, I would wager that the 200D would be faster! It was my first car, capable of exactly 63 MPH on a flat, level road. Developed an aversion to VW that lasts to this day. $7000 for that slug, in the rust belt, not perfect?? They’re smoking some good stuff! Not drivable on ANY interstate, IMO-merging with traffic would be physically impossible, would be slower than a loaded concrete truck…

 

[dwgwater]

My dad had a white '67. It's the car I learned to drive on. As if I don't have enough problems already. Thanks.
And yes, 0-60 times were measured with a sundial. I do love the look of it. The famous Mercedes fintail/heckflosse

 

[RooflessVW]

Wonderful.

Needs a modern engine swap BAD

 

[justalubetech]

0-60 mph for this is literally 29 seconds... It's decent to look at but yeah these are agonizing to drive, especially in modern traffic.

 

[mrsilv04]

Did someone intentionally put some tires off of a Tata Nano on it?

 

[StarCaller]

I had a 1971 Citroen 2CV, like 25hp, top speed 62mph ("from 0–60 mph in one day") /
Sometimes in the winter it was running only on one cylinder - top speed was like 40/45 mph....

 

[atikovi]

$7000 for that slug, in the rust belt, not perfect?? They’re smoking some good stuff! Not drivable on ANY interstate, IMO-merging with traffic would be physically impossible, would be slower than a loaded concrete truck…

I had this 1971 some twenty years ago. Maybe only 5 or 10 more hp. Had NO problems merging on to or driving on the highway. You have more fun driving a slow car fast than you do a fast car slow.

 

[spasm3]

Plus, it's in NY. What's it look like underneath?

If it were great underneath, there would be pics.

 

[oggb]

I had this 1971 some twenty years ago. Maybe only 5 or 10 more hp. Had NO problems merging on to or driving on the highway. You have more fun driving a slow car fast than you do a fast car slow.

View attachment 136172

What a looker. I've never seen one in bright red like that.

 

[FishFry]

Actually surprisingly cheap, you would pay at least twice as much over here.
And yes, the 200D is no race car, it was known as "Farmer Mercedes", cause a lot of farmers drove it on cheap subsidized diesel they got for their tractors.

And for the record, they still driving around on our Autobahns, so I guess they are doing fine in US highway traffic.

 

[OVERKILL]

Maybe because the car is not entertaining to drive, inexpensive to own, or beautiful to look at (IMO). With only 55 hp and 87 lb-ft on tap, the car does 0-60 in about 25 seconds, on-par with a VW Beetle 1200, in other words VERY slow. Additionally, they say that it has 27k miles on the rebuilt engine, but it doesn't mention how many miles are on the car itself. That engine was famously long-lived and durable, so the car itself might have 400k or more miles on it.

I think the acceleration (or lack thereof) of this car was described in a Stephen King novel, one which I can't recall the name of right now unfortunately.

 

[atikovi]

It's a 4 cylinder import from the 60's. No slower than a typical VW, Renault or Fiat of that era. You're comparing it to big block muscle cars getting 5-6 mpg that have have to fill up with gas every 100 miles?

 

[FishFry]

Plus, it's in NY. What's it look like underneath?

If it were great underneath, there would be pics.

Usually the only problem is the rocker panels, and some spots at the fenders, the rest is pretty much bullet proof.
Also - as I understand it - it spend most of his live in a German garage. From the pictures, it doesn't look terrible at all, maybe even the first pain.

 

[gman2304]

It's a 4 cylinder import from the 60's. No slower than a typical VW,

0 to 60 time for a 1966 VW beetle was 23 seconds. This MB had a 0 to 60 time of 29 seconds. Both were slugs but still……..

 

[BHopkins]

Who cares what the 0-60 is? A car like that would be fun to just drive around town, or for a leisurely drive on a country road. Of course, with no a/c, it kind of limits the times that you would be able to enjoy it.

It looks like it would take some work, to get it where it would be decent. New carpet. Major interior detail. Pop out the dent in the front right door. Get the bumpers pounded out and straightened.

NADA says retail high/average/low is $11,400/$7,975/$3,925. If it weren't on the other side of the country, I'd be tempted to offer them $4,500.

Plus, it's in NY. What's it look like underneath?

If it were great underneath, there would be pics.

It's only been in the U.S. since 2006. Perhaps they haven't driven it in the winter? But that is something that would definitely need to be looked at.

 

[wag123]

0 to 60 time for a 1966 VW beetle was 23 seconds. This MB had a 0 to 60 time of 29 seconds. Both were slugs but still……..

In 1966 the Beetle had a 1300 engine which was indeed faster than the earlier 1200. Either one of the Beetles were more entertaining to drive by virtue of the fact that they were well over 1/2 ton lighter.

 

[bullwinkle]

I had this 1971 some twenty years ago. Maybe only 5 or 10 more hp. Had NO problems merging on to or driving on the highway. You have more fun driving a slow car fast than you do a fast car slow.

View attachment 136172

I did have a 300D Turbodiesel (‘82) in recent times-if you got on it and stayed on it, the turbo would pull it along fairly well. I’ve driven a 240D, it was pretty slow-I can‘t even imagine a 200D! You would literally get run over on ANY expressway! This isn’t the land of 55 MPH national speed limits & Smokey hiding behind every billboard & bridge abutment anymore…

 

[RooflessVW]

I've been thinking about this car.

I think a KA24DE with dual Weber 40s and a 5 speed would be perfect. Maybe some lumpy cams and a header