Happy Friday, Autopians! We made it! Today on Shitbox Showdown, it’s finery versus fun as we look at a pair of coupes from the Continent. Before we go, though, let’s see which SUV you picked yesterday:
Holy crap! That’s the closest vote we’ve had in a while. But it looks like the burly old-school Ford wins it by a mere three votes. This was a bit of an apples-and-oranges comparison – two vehicles that look and seem similar but really aren’t.
And that’s what we’ve got today as well: two European coupes, as different as they are alike. Both suit different purposes and different personalities, but either one could be exactly the right car for someone out there. Let’s take a look.
1988 Mercedes Benz 300CE – $6,950
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0 liter overhead cam inline 6, four-speed automatic, RWD
Location: vancouver, WA
Odometer reading: 140,000 miles
Runs/drives? Yep
Once upon a time, before all that nonsense they’re up to now, engineers at Mercedes Benz were concerned with one thing and one thing only: quality. They spent eight years designing this car, the W124 platform, and it shows in all the little details: a silky-smooth inline six, slippery aerodynamics that cut wind noise, and that legendary “thunk” when you shut the door. It didn’t have to be ultra-luxurious, or jam-packed with technological gadgets; it just had to be excellent.
It’s a great looking car from just about any angle, especially compared to the overstyled blobs of today. It’s clean and timeless in that form-follows-function way that you don’t see much of today. Form still follows function in today’s cars, but part of that function is protecting its occupants from any chance of harm at the expense of things like outward visibility. You’ll find no such problems here: the 300CE is a pillarless hardtop. Roll down all four side windows, and you’re rewarded with wide uninterrupted openings.
This particular 300CE is in beautiful shape. It has 140,000 miles on it, barely broken-in for a W124, and the seller says it runs and drives well. Nothing lasts forever, but Mercedes of this era give it a good try. And mark my words: In the post-apocalyptic wastelands of the future, the most sought-after clothing will be made from recycled M-B Tex, and it will still look like new.
These 124 coupes are nowhere near as common as their sedan siblings, and finding one in this condition with this few miles is a treat. Sure, it’s not fast or particularly nimble, and its days as a status symbol are long gone, but it’s pleasant in that special way that only well-made things are.
1979 Volvo 242 DL – $4,999
Engine/drivetrain: 2.1 liter overhead cam inline 4, four-speed manual, RWD
Location: St Helens, OR
Odometer reading: unknown
Runs/drives? Sure does
And now we go from something sleek and aerodynamic to something… not. Yes, it’s everyone’s favorite brick, the Volvo 240, here in 242 two-door form. It’s another car renowned for longevity, but in a more brutalist style: no wind-tunnel smoothing or multi-link suspension systems here. Compared to the Mercedes above, this 242 is a glorified tractor.
And yet, there’s something about the looks of this car that resonates with people. Somehow all these rough-hewn elements combine in just the right way to balance each other out, and make a car that looks purposeful, but approachable. Volvo 240s aren’t pretty, but damn are they charismatic.
This particular 242 is a bit of a hodgepodge: the interior is parts of at least a couple of different cars, and that homemade plate with the toggle switches is intriguing. The Nardi steering wheel in place of the traditional Volvo rectangle-in-a-circle is a nice touch, as are the big round driving lights. It’s got the good stuff where it counts: a 2.1 liter “red block” engine with a four-speed manual (no overdrive, sorry), and the seller says it runs just fine. A host of newly-replaced parts are listed in the ad.
These Volvos get fixed-up piecemeal like this with such regularity that it’s hard to know what is and isn’t stock any more. But the good news is that parts are cheap and plentiful, and these cars aren’t hard to work on (except the heater blower fan motor, I’m told).
There you have it: a pair of Europeans with four doors between them. One is refined and smooth, the other rougher, but more fun. Which one is more your style?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
The Mercedes all day long. Looks like it was well loved and taken care of. The Volvo, taken care of by Frankensteining everything that could be done.
The Mercedes is a much nicer, more sophisticated car, but a bit of a head scratcher from an enthusiast perspective. Who buys this? A fashionable but aging business professional, looking for a Sunday cruiser to evoke their yuppy prime? A hipster art director looking for a suitable backdrop for their latest retro swimwear photoshoot? A small-time local drug dealer with complex tastes?
The Mercedes presented in the ad is as nice as it will ever be. Future ownership can only really consist of fastidious maintenance and delicate driving, to preserve the fragile surface integrity of this symbol of 80’s excess.
The Volvo on the other hand, agricultural as its drivetrain may be, has nowhere to go but up. Rust-free RWD Volvos are appreciating slowly but surely, and this one is only some trim and interior bits away from cleaning up nicely.
These early 240s are anachronistic in all the right ways- swoopy 60’s body lines, 70’s corduroy, and a strangely clean and modern dash that wouldn’t be out of place in a 90s sedan. They are built to drive the snot out of on a regular basis- Tons of suspension travel, 50/50 weight distribution, more than willing to engage in tail-happy RWD antics even in stock form.
Throw some black Recaros in to match the dash, IPD springs to ease the body roll + some decent wheels and rubber, and you’ve got a fun classic toy to beat on at the local auto X. If you can keep it out of the ditch, you’ll have a lot of fun and it will probably even be worth more than when you started.
Regarding the CE, if you look at the numbers, you would be correct. However, I’ve owned one for about two years now, a 92 (I own a few other “proper enthusiast” cars, too) and have a few things to share.
Driving the CE is sublime, intoxicating. It’s tactile, smooth but alive. The ride quality is not to be believed. Aw well, it is in fact spirted and powerful–not fast, but powerful. Its a soft ride, gentle ride, and then almost as if by magic, it’ll handle whatever you throw at it with aplomb.
In short, drive one and you’ll never want to stop.
The Mercedes is a gorgeous car for sure, but something about that Volvo makes me want to give it a go. The price is steep, but a quick detail and I bet it’d be almost as shiny and deep as the Benz (without the leather.)
In the same vein, I love me a modern John Deere with all the bells and whistles and creature comforts, but an old Ford 8n or midsize Allis-Chalmers is a great tractor, too.
I know you probably know but the Mercedes coupe in the article has leather seats and not mb-tex
I voted Volvo. We’ve owned many, presently we have an 87 245, 5speed. This ones our third 240-all manuals. That Merc is beautiful though. Is that the model with the $5000 evaporator replacement? I don’t recall the years but I think it’s that platform.
Gotta go- 245 master cylinder and clutch adjustment await.
Older, hodgepodge, interesting bits, a bit battered and bruised, ymmv…. me and the Volvo fit well together!
The Mercedes deserves a better ending than I can provide, it is lovely and I agree that it seems very well kept, hence my reluctance to sully it.
You can always add an overdrive to the Volvo. It’s not complicated.
I own an ’89 245, so my first instinct was to vote for the volvo…. but the interior and general rattyness of that car put me off of the sure bet flat hood/2.1 combo. you’ll spend some real money getting that car up to snuff, and it’ll end up more expensive than than Merc. That W124 is a real treat to drive even if you’re not rowing your own… and its looks like it was fastidiously looked after…
My parents had an ’83 Volvo 240 sedan in that color. Drove it well over 200,000 miles. It was around until 1992, so I got to drive on occasion myself. I respect the hell out of the car, but I don’t have a great deal of nostalgia for it. I’ve had the experience so I’d go with the Mercury because it would be a new automotive experience.
Did this thing auto correct “Merc” to Mercury or was my brain off. I meant Merc.
“Merc” means “Mercury” in Murca, commie.
The Volvo for sure. I used to daily a ’79 242 about a decade ago. It was a reasonably nice car. They’re comfortable, great in the snow, and a bit fun to drive. This one even has the manual, the automatic in mine was it’s worst feature.
That Frankenstein’s Volvo does have the turbo engine, but does the rest of the car hold up to the HP upgrade?
That W124 is my second-favorite Mercedes coupe after the 300SL Gullwing! When Patrick Swayze opened-up the movie Roadhouse by driving one of these to a storage unit, and buying a 70’s beater barge, even as a pre-enthusiast teenager, I was nodding my head at his wisdom.
The irony? The Riviera is worth more than the Benz now. Especially if the headlights work.
I think that was its big brother, the 500 SEC.
I’m at the age where I remember Mercs of this era being the internationally understood symbol that you had achieved a laudable level of success in your life. The W124 still oozes with gravitas. Merc by a mile.
Too tough to decide… they are both spectacular in their own ways. I could sell my Focus ST and buy both of them…
This is what you get when you take a $2000 Merc and add a $4950 detailing job. Well done!
The rally lights had me ready to vote for the Volvo. “Boxy, but good” and manual to boot. It’s not a bad deal, but then I read about the Mercedes. That’s a gem of a used car.
The Ford vs Toyota should not have been that close… A body-on-frame 4×4 V6 manual trans SUV should have grabbed the cake and run off with it.
Meh, I hate explorers, and Fords from the 90s, and while I would never buy the 4 door rav4, the convertible is on my shortlist for my next car. They are quirky and fun compared to the exploder that is the least innovative thing out there, and with the same miles on them, the rav4 will last a lot longer. I know the 4.0 is a good engine, but it’s not up to par with a 90s toyota.