Incorrect seats in my 1968 280SL ???

[66andBlue]

John,
I was also trying to find out when headrests became standard on USA cars. I read once that it started with VIN 4052,  but I have my doubts - on request possible, but standard? Unfortunately, Engelen who has documented all the major changes does not mention them.  I have asked Dave Gallon to dig through his brochures and to let me know what he comes up with.

[Garry]

My Vin was 007785 for March 1969 so if the USA had gone with head rests as standard by then, then MB were building two different seat types on the same production line, one for Euro and one for USA.  I guess thats quite probable given that there were many differences from the Euro to the USA models.

Garry

[Bonnyboy]

My vin is 014688 on a Euro so much later than 007785 and it still has no headrests.  They are leather seats so I don't know if that makes a difference. 

[Garry]

Ian,

A November 1969 production. Are they the thinner seats.  Mine were also leather.

[66andBlue]

John,
I was also trying to find out when headrests became standard on USA cars. I read once that it started with VIN 4052,  but I have my doubts - on request possible, but standard? Unfortunately, Engelen who has documented all the major changes does not mention them.  I have asked Dave Gallon to dig through his brochures and to let me know what he comes up with.

Turns out VIN 004052 is correct!
Dave Gallon has a USA parts list which shows that on USA version 280SL cars the headrests were installed beginning with this VIN.
Those cars that came without them probably were ordered like that - just like John did.
Now were they ever installed as a standard option on non-USA cars?

[mbzse]

Now were they [headrests] ever installed as a standard option on non-USA cars?

Headrests were an added choice (SA 573) for the big markets in Europe (like Germany), from middle 1968 up to the end of production. I believe, same goes for non-US markets everywhere else (?).

A car equipped with them should have it indicated in its Data card.   When items were standard equipment [for a specific market] however, the items were not noted in the data card of the car.
Will be interesting to see what we in our Pagoda "community" (=Forum members) can find out further about the matter
/Hans in Sweden

[66andBlue]

Hans,
would you have a German/European sales brochure with the SA/option codes for the 280SL that show code 57/3 ?
Dave has a May 1965 brochure that indicates that codes 57/1 and 57/2 were not available for the 230SL.

[mbzse]

Hans, would you have a German/European sales brochure with the SA/option codes for the 280SL.../..

I do, the WZ 1319 sales broschure [German language] printed August 1968 shows the Head rest as an option for the 280SL customer so inclined
Further, a Swedish broschure 8833 dated June 1968 mentions head rests as being something you can have as an option.
/Hans in Sweden

.

[114015]

For what's worth ...

fully agree with Alfred's and Hans' findings.
Head rests were an option from VIN 004052 onwards for the 280 SL non-US versions. For US-280ies standard since then.

By the way.... the seats were not different for head rests or non-head rests as well as there are no differences between seats for the US and non-US versions!

The Pagoda seats changed their design several times between 1964 and 1970 with most changes taking place during the production run of the 230 SL, in particular within the built (= calendar) years 1964 - 1966 (i.e. seat types 1 - 4).
This includes the fact that the late 230 SL seats (from VIN 017861 onwards, seat type 4) had the thicker backrest in exactly the same way as the 250 (seat type 4) and 280 SLs (seat type 5 = different seat covers).

And that's why Fritz68's seats are incorrect for a 280 SL (seat type 2 = 230 SL between 002927 - 012466), sorry to say so but I stand with what I mentioned before.



Head rests were available only for the 280 SL (from serial 004052 onwards, as indicated above) but can be retrofitted to any of the earlier cars as well. See pictures attached.

IMHO


Achim
(ear-headrest collector)

[Paul & Dolly]

Achim,

So are my seats original for my May 1967 250 SL,
They appear to be the thinner type backrest, shown in
my post here of Jan 23.

Paul  ( sending 50 year form off today)

[114015]

So are my seats original for my May 1967 250 SL,
They appear to be the thinner type backrest, shown in
my post here of Jan 23.

Paul,

With the exception of the seat covers on your pics (which are clearly aftermarket) your seats appear to be fully correct.

Of course, John "49er"'s and "holy grail"'s seats are also fully factory correct. Same holds true for Garry's seats with the exception of the new leather covers.
Of note, if you want to compare what is original or not, you must look at "untouched" cars and not at "complete(d) restorations". The latter often falsifiy somehow or strongly the original condition and/or dimensions.
Therefore, often untouched "barn finds" are a much better reference about "what is original" and "what is not" than any >> 100,000 $$ outstanding award-winning restorations/new-creations.

But gladly we have cars here like the ones from 49er, TheLews, MichaelB, motoringinvestments and a few others to name which provide us with the necessary info about "what is factory correct" and "what is not".
 

Achim
(113 info collector)

[mbzse]

.../... my May 2967 250 SL, my seats I presume have not been changed - but then - who knows- after 45 years !

Paul, as a comparison I attach pictures of an original black leather seat in a 250SL with the same production Month as your own car.
/Hans in Sweden

[mbzse]

a

[Paul & Dolly]

Hans, Achim,

Thanks for the help,
My interior was assaulted some time ago by a previous owner,
the central wood console box and the sunvisors were all covered in black
leathercloth......and a rear leather bench seat was fitted.

I have just had the seats overhauled, I got the leather facings from
padise@meisterberg.com  in Germany, very helpful guy called Dirk.

I have also recarpeted the car now in a non original silver gray, as I
found the totally black interior needed brightening up.

See you all in August, I hope

Paul

[Raymond]

It is a misconception to think that every change happened at the time the model number changed.  There was some overlap based on a remaining stock of parts.  My 1968 280, serial # 000176, came off of the line in early November 1967.  I'm told that was before the last 250s.  My engine block was serial # 000096.  The owner's manual that was with my car's other documents is for a 250.  The seats look the same as the 230 and 250 but the seat back vents are plastic.  I did take my driver's seat apart last summer and found a piece of paper wedged between the spring and seat pad that looked like it came from the factory.  It does not appear the seats have ever been recovered and the material matches the rear bench seat perfectly inside and out including the patina.

[mbzse]

.../...  My 1968 280, serial # 000176, came off of the line in early November 1967.../...

Really. On what basis do you make this statement?
/Hans in Sweden

[FRITZ68]

My 1968 Model 280SL has a Serial # of 000051 and Block # 000020 (very early model I have been told).  I did not yet check to see if the seat vents are plastic or metal, as interior is still masked from our recent paint job.  Possibly this could account for my seats being narrow (2-3/4" - 3" across center of top). They do not have headrests of course.  Thanks for so much research on all of this - very interesting.

Fritz

[Neil Thompson]

this was an interesting discussion some time ago and here's a little quiz for the experts here. Have a look at the photos and identify the model, a clue perhaps is the measurement across the top of the seat is 3"

Neil