Incorrect seats in my 1968 280SL ???

[FRITZ68]

In an earlier post that I started last week regarding adding striping on my car (decided not to stripe), it was brought to my attention that I may have the wrong seats in my car by Achim.  I have the history of this car from the 2nd lady owner who owned the car from 1975 to the date of my purchase last spring.  The first owner bought the car new and sold it to her husband, who had it shipped to the US as a surprise present for his wife. I have all of the receipts since, and there was no mention of seats, although during that period of time, anything is certainly possible and everything may not have been documented. The seats look original to me, although I recently had them reupholstered by a local shop, as there was some damage. I furnished the shop a roll of original Mercedes material that was furnished by the previous lady owner from Cleveland. 

Since we attempting to keep the car original, would like some input on the seats if possible, so that if replaced, I will know what to look for.

Here are Achim's comments regarding the seats:

What's this??
68 MB Interior1a.jpg (288.68 KB, 900x675 - viewed 6 times.)   

Have you got 230 seats in your 280?? 
The seat hinge hardware and the narrow seat back clearly indicate 230 seats (seat type 2) until VIN 012466 to me ...

Surely, it's not your fault but who the heck did that?

That's another mark on the to-do-list for the upcoming years ....

Sorry to say so...

Achim
(being a meanie today ... sorry)  (End of Achim's comments).


For information, I am attaching the following:

a) Exterior picture of my wife's car before our present paint job, listing the Vin # 113-044-12-000051.  Car had chrome arches over the wheels, which we will NOT be installing if I can talk my wife out of it (she likes them, but.......)

b) Interior picture of my wife's car showing the seats after being reupholstered using original MB material.

c) Interior picture of another 1968 Mercedes (red one) restored by the Classic Mercedes-Bens Classic Center in CA and for sale for $180,000 U.S. That one had chassis #  113-044-12-002587.

So my question is this:  To me the seats look about the same in both cars.  The hinges and latching look the same and the seats in my car bolted up into the original mounting holes.  What differences should I be looking for?  Once I know what to look for, I may consider changing the seats at a later date.  This is a German version of the car, as was purchased in Germany when new and stayed there for 7 or 8 years prior to being shipped to Cleveland.

I am in hopes that I can figure this out and any help extended will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks for looking,

 Fritz

[66andBlue]

....  What differences should I be looking for?  Once I know what to look for, I may consider changing the seats at a later date.  This is a German version of the car, as was purchased in Germany when new .......

The main differences between the 230SL and the 280SL seats are the width of the backrest, the material used in the backrest vents, and the hand wheels to change the seat tilts. Very early 230SL chrome covers under these wheels also are different.
Here are photos showing these main differences. The 230SL vents are metal (use a magnet to check) whereas the 280SL ones are plastic and are attached differently as shown.
230SL seats can be changed easily to 280SL seats by using thicker horse hair padding for the back rests. The wider backrest is necessary to accommodate head rests.
Also to my knowledge all seat upholstery, MB-tex vinyl and leather, had only 4 pleats or pipes and was always uni-color.

You might want to spend some time looking at the detailed photos that Brian Peters provides on his Mercedes page for his restorations and cars that he sold:
http://www.motoringinvestments.com/MainPage.htm

[49er]

 Here is a photo of my original interior. As this was a very early 1969 model, no head restraints were installed.

John

[66andBlue]

Hi John,
nice seats - look like nobody ever sat in them! 
How wide are they at the narrowest point on top?  I am attaching a photo of my 230SL backrest before and after it was modified to allow retrofitting with head rests. They are now about 11 cm (4.25 inch) wide whereas the original 230SL backrest  (like the one in the right panel from Peters' web site) was about 8 cm (3.25  inch) wide.

[49er]

Hi John,
nice seats - look like nobody ever sat in them! 
How wide are they at the narrowest point on top

 The drivers side is a bit more worn then the passenger but the MBTex really held up well over the years. 2.5 inches is the distance across the top so Fritz68's seats might be correct after all.

John

[Jonny B]

Not quite on topic for the seats, but what are the two toggle switches at the front of the console for?

[66andBlue]

Wow!  
2.5 inches that is very narrow for a 280SL seat!
I wonder what Achim has to say here.  

[49er]

Not quite on topic for the seats, but what are the two toggle switches at the front of the console for?

After my original power anntena quit, I purchased a another power antenna from of all places, J.C. Whitney and the toggle on the left controlled it. The one on the right is for the fog lights. I always liked to be able to use them at the same time as the regular sealed beams. I also can use them as daytime running lights.

John

[49er]

Wow!  
2.5 inches that is very narrow for a 280SL seat!
I wonder what Achim has to say here.  

A picture is worth a 1000 words:-)

[Garry]

John,

Did you specify no head restraints and if so maybe they found a set of seats, which happen to be the earlier ones to meet the customers request?  I always thought that the later seats were widened to fit the head restraints requirement for the US market and then added them to all Pagodas, head restraint or not.  My 280 which was 10 March 1969 did not have head restraints but had the wider seat.

[49er]

 When I ordered the car in May of 1968 I didn't know I was going to wind up with a '69 model. As delivery came closer, I was told by the dealer it was going to be a '69 model and it would have the "dog eared" head restraints. I was not to happy to hear that as I didn't particularly like the look of the restraints but as it turned out, no restraints were installed. An "Allowance for omission of head restraints" of $71 was subtracted from the car's invoice. All other features of the '69 model were installed (dull chrome on the horn ring, inside rear view mirror, and wiper arms/blades. Side reflectors too). When I went down to the port to see the car the night it was unloaded there were three other SL's there (mine was the only white one so I knew it was mine:-) All the other SL's also had their Head restraints omitted as well.

John

[FRITZ68]

A picture is worth a 1000 words:-)

I just measured the depth at the top center of the seats in my 1968 280SL and they are between 2-1/2" to 2-3/4" exactly the same as pictured by 49er.  I was told that my car is an early 1968 Euro model (sold new in Germany if that makes any difference), and car was delivered without headrests as I can determine.  Based on the previous history of the car, I do not feel that seats have been changed, but anything is possible and I certainly respect the opinions of Achim and others on this forum.  I really doubt if anyone would ever notice anyhow.

Fritz

[Paul & Dolly]

Fritz,
Lovely to have your own museum.

If it helps, probably confuses - I took these dimensions last year when ordering new leather facings for my
May 2967 250 SL, my seats I presume have not been changed - but then - who knows- after 45 years !

I have enjoyed looking at your cars

Keep well

Paul

[w113dude]

I don't come across too many cars that are original but seeing John's (49er) interior makes me realize why cars in original condition are so desirable, there is something about the look that can not be duplicated no matter how how hard one tries, it's just beautiful.

[49er]

Thanks Shaun for your comment In the spring of 1999, a year before I retired, I was very close to selling my SL. I knew we would be moving the next year and since the car was not in good running condition and not wanting to "fool with it", I began the process. I took some pictures, made "For Sale" signs and was ready to put an ad in the Auto Trader. $18K, OBO. My co-workers thought I was crazy and at their and my wife's insistance (primarily wife's insistance), the ad was never placed and the signs were tossed. The following year, we managed to get the car up on a trailer and we towed it behind our U-Haul to our new home up here in Nor Cal. It was still a while before I got the car running again but those dollars spent in bringing it back to life were absolutely the best investment I have ever made. Lesson here...always listen to your wife!  

John

[114015]

I don't come across too many cars that are original but seeing John's (49er) interior makes me realize why cars in original condition are so desirable, there is something about the look that can not be duplicated no matter how how hard one tries, it's just beautiful.

I can only fully agree here.
Just beautiful. Like just take out of the sales brochure!
A living time piece.


Achim

[114015]

Well .....?

2.5 inches or 3.5 inches ... it all doesn't help much, Fritz.
Your seats do not look correct to me for a very very ealry 280 SL (VIN 51, you have got one of the earliest 280ies I have ever come across.... Congratulations !! )

I uploaded three pics here.
One is your seat, one from an original 230 SL (seat type 2, like yours) and one of a 280 SL (seat type 5, which should be the one for your car; seat type 5a to be exact).

The both other pics are from members here.
The red circles on your seats indicate the areas which show that your seats _are not_ from a 280 SL but earlier ones.

It is always amazing to me again how little is known by most here about this topic.
Well?
I once started to summarize all differences among the seats that were used on our SLs and "published" that table on the Pagodentreff forum.
But I soon realized, there is more input necessary, pics, differences, a better overview.
Since then I have promised to write up an article on the seats but I have not found yet a rainy Sunday with plenty of time to do this job.
So, this is still on the "to-do list" for me.
Will do this "soon".

You can make absolutely sure which kind of seats you have when you go and remove the carpet-covered back panel of the seat back (2 chromed Philips screws at the bottom). Then you can see inside the seat. You will find that there is the winding bar across the seat back that is driven by the black turnwheel on the outside of the seat. This bar winds up and down with the help of two nylon bands, one on each side. This mechanism was only used on the early two seat types 1 and 2 for 230 SLs until July 1965.

Sorry to say so, your seats are from a 230 SL.
The "illusion" that they "somehow" may look being from a 280 comes also from the fact that the two times your seats got new covers (in 1985 and last year) can falsify "dimensions" a little bit.


Achim

[114015]

arrgh,

one pic missing: your seats!

[Garry]

So Achim, how to then explain the seats in John's car (49er)that is also one of the first 280's that are the thinner seats of the earlier cars? and not type 5a   This appears to contradict the theory that the type 2 seats were limited to the 230 and maybe the earlier 250?

[49er]

I am a bit confused as well.

About the seats

John

[FRITZ68]

I am confused also.  Right now the car is being sanded and buffed and the seats are all covered with plastic, paper and masking tape as car was painted with the removable top off the car, so taking more measurements at this time is not possible.  I will be checking the rear carpeted part of the seat in about 2 weeks or so.  However, my "no headrest seat" dimensions at the top (about 2-12' to 2-3/4") look to be identical thickness as the very original seats from John (49er's) thin seat model without headrests?  I do not feel that comparing with a seat that has headrests is a proper comparison, since Mercedes went for a wider seat to accomodate such headrests and any car with headrests would have to be thicker.   I am thinking that early or special order models without headrests (like John's 49er car and possibly my car) may have very well been the thinner type (2-1/2" to 2-3/4" at the top).  While this is not a certainity, it is at least a possibility. 

I mentioned previously that my car was painted in 1985.  I don't believe that I said (nor do I know) that the seats were recovered in 1985 when car was repainted. According to the previous long-time lady owner, the car was originally white in color, but was repainted in MB-180 silver color in 1985 and repainted in the same color last week.  I have the receipts for the 1985 paint job and other work from R&D Auto in Cleveland over a period of about 30 years, and no reference or cost info on any upholstery work.   Looking at my car (based on my experience, car's known history and appearance) the car looks to have a very well cared for original interior.  Could the seats have been substituted over this period of time?  Maybe yes, maybe no, but I plan to enjoy the car regardless and replacing the seats is not on the agenda.

It may have been possible that my car (being such an early 1968 model) had seats from 1967 or even another year or model at that time, since they were switching over to seats with headrests.  If a customer wanted no headrests, would it not be at least a possibility that another seat could have been substitituted at the factory?  So now we have established this:  John (49er)'s seats seem to be very original and measure about approximately 2-1/2" wide across the narrow portion of the top.  My car (which appears to have an original interior and known history) measures about the same.  Posting a picture of a 280 with wide seats with head rests does not seem to be a good comparison.  We may need further research ??

Thanks for all of the input on this.  While I have no plans to make any changes in my seats, I find all of this discussion very informative and interesting.

Fritz

[Iconic]

While I have no plans to make any changes in my seats, I find all of this discussion very informative and interesting.

I hope that is true, because we are not trying to find fault with your car, but we are trying to learn and know everything there is to know about these magnificent automobiles.
In fact, your car (and cars, your SEb is gorgeous), is of a very high caliber, as you well know.
I hope to visit your museum and I only wish you had more Mecedes, because the ones you have are a pleasure to look at.
Thank you for being part of the group.
Mark

[66andBlue]

I am confused also.  ......  I find all of this discussion very informative and interesting.

It is indeed very confusing - Mercedes sold five different versions of Pagoda seats (!) - and I am glad that we have this discussion. I contacted Brian Peters (Motoringinvestments.com) today and asked him to measure the dimensions of the backrest on his very original 280SL (VIN 010589) that he calls the 'Holy Grail" of originality. This car was delivered with headrests and should be a good comparison with John "49er"'s car.
Since he did not have a suitable photo of the seat I put the numbers on another very original 280SL (VIN 13132) that he once had.
It appears that 280SL backrests with headrests are about 1 inch thicker on top than those that came without.

Of course, we need to keep in mind that the replacement pads for a 280SL one can purchase today are all molded and pre-cut to accommodate headrests. They are for sure thicker than the originals.

[Garry]

It is indeed an interesting discussion.

Here is a photo of my old 280SL interior that came without headrests, delivered in Scotland in 1969 Not able to measure them now that I dont own it any more but they look to be the thinner seats!!!!

Garry

[49er]

Alfred, I measured the side of my seat and they match your measurements. Also, in looking at Garry's, they look identical to mine. Interesting to find out when 1969 SL models sold in the US actually were delivered with the head restraints installed.

John