This might be a nice one??

[terry shores]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Mint-Ca-Original-1970-Mercedes-280-SL-w-38K-orig-miles_W0QQitemZ120019685717QQihZ002QQcategoryZ6338QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[Ed Cave]

It looks fairly nice. Although the ad uses the word "original" like eight times, it has obviously been tampered with; evident in the trunk, dash (a/c), steering wheel (horn pad), etc. Not bad, though.

Ed Cave
Atlanta, GA


1971 280SL
1973 911S
2004 A4 3.0
2006 GS430

[Douglas]

I've got to disagree. To me, the car has some serious flags for something purporting to be an "untouched original." The interior is particularly telling -- recovered dash (note the seam in front), the ridiculous tan steering wheel, aftermarket carpeting, re-dyed or re-wrapped a/c unit, re-dyed sunvisors, that trunk (!), etc. How does a car with so few miles end up needing a completely new interior?  

It still may be a good car, but it's clearly not the kind of virginal car they describe it as.

Douglas Kim
New York
USA

[enochbell]

This one does look strange.  Douglas points to the worries, but how did the original firewall pad, in PERFECT shape, survive?  Show us the original muffler and heat shields and I might be convinced... Maybe it really is a low mileage survivor? Not unmolested, mind you, with that strange dash and carpet, but maybe that was just smog repair?

g

'64 230sl, fully sorted out...ooops, spoke too soon

[joelj]

I agree, the write up is a lot of hype. I guess thats why it did not sell.

1969 280sl auto
White exterior
Blue interior

[norton]

also No door pockets

Mike Halleck
Chesterfield Mi
71 280SL
68 250SL (parts car)
94 E320 Coupe

[Ed Fisher]

Hey gang.  While I wouldn't have noticed any of the stuff that you quickly pointed out, I am wondering about the side stance.  Does that ride height, front and back look about right?  The reason I ask is because mine looks about the same and I didn't know if I was low in the front (still have a knocking on bumps after subframe bushing replacement).  Could I need spring pads in the front?

Thanks as always.

Ed Fisher in Dallas

[Ed Cave]

Ed:

In response to your question regarding stance, I'd say the car looks a little high in the back and/or a little low in the front compared to mine and most others I've seen.

Ed Cave
Atlanta, GA


1971 280SL
1973 911S
2004 A4 3.0
2006 GS430

[Mike]

I agree with Ed as to the stance.  The side view pictures make the car look like the wheel base has been lengthened several inches but I guess it's an optical illusion.  There also seems to be a lot of "refreshing" of things in the engine compartment that belie the originality claims.  See the black painted throttle linkage and silver painted injector lines, each of which should be cad plated.

Michael L. Hund

[al_lieffring]

quote:Originally posted by Ed Fisher

 I am wondering about the side stance.  Does that ride height, front and back look about right?

If the center spring on the rear axle is from a sedan, (possibly from an axle replscement) that will cause the rear end to ride too high.

Al  :O)

113-042-10-014715
built 11 Jan 66
904/396 blue, Ivory Tex
condition- rust bucket

[Longtooth]

When somebody says "UNTOUCHED ORIGINAL ", then shows pics of the interior dash, door panels with no pockets, and trunk (did you get a load of that wheel cover in the trunk???!!!!, padded A/C, all of which make it look like an overstuffed camel... and not only was the steering wheel pad redone, but so is ashtray cover...  you have to walk away.  If you look carefully at the front seat & dash pics you'll see a remarkable level of reflection from radio speaker wood and edge of the dash wood... so the wood's not original by any stretch.

Then there's the 38k milage... so what did this driver do... let the car sit in the garage most of it's lifetime?  We're talking '70 thur '06... 36 years... that's a tad over 1k miles/year on average... or an average of 87 miles/mo?  

There are other tell-tales in the description... no mention of matching numbers, for example... the Options list a cassette player... not in the 'original' Becker, so where is it?  In the glove compartment?... stuck in the platform behind the seats?

And are those the original white-walls?  38k miles and 36 year old tires that sat for most of it's life without revolving?

Not that the car doesn't look good... body looks great, chome that can be seen looks good and is complete...what's with the radio antenna though... it's sticking up about 12" like it's either not fully extended, or more likely not the original type antenna.  Floor matts do look in great condition... but that trunk!!! Ughliiiiii!

Despite the appearance of body/chrome, the write-up is pure unadulterated, unabased hype, dare I say outright lies, intended for a newbie that hasn't got a clue about what he / she may be buying... so why would anybody buy a car that's obviously not as it's being described unless the buyer didn't know that the car isn't as it's being described in fact?  If you can't believe the write-up, what makes anybody think they can believe anything about the car's looks & condition, or whether panels or hoods have been replaced or not.

Longtooth
67 250SL US #113-043-10-002163
'02 SL500 Sport

[Longtooth]

Al, if the stance is incorrect... and I'm not sure that's the case... but if it were, and the reason was due to a a center spring from a sedan (or axel replacement) then why would an original, 38k original miles car need a new center spring or axel replacement?!!!!!  Rear-ended perhaps?  Totaled in fact?  Or is the 38k on the odometer been around once already... as I'd be more inclined to believe unless I saw a registration change and / or smog check mileage history for this VIN.

About the stance though... there were two suspension springs designated in the BBB... one for standard driving, the other were for 'hardened' driving, so it may be that some of the appearance of back-high/front low stance is due to one set of springs (front) being one type, the others (rear) being of the other type.... which would also indicate we're not talking about an original milage (38k)... or there were some suspension modifications not to the "completely original" spec's.

Longtooth
67 250SL US #113-043-10-002163
'02 SL500 Sport

[nick350]

It's funny that you bring up low mileage, there are so many cars advertised that have similar low mileage, 2k a year. In fact if a car has only done 5k a year which is nothing when it wasn't a 'classic' then thats 180.000 miles in a 36 year old car. When I bought mine and asked that the c clip was clipped back in on the trip meter they just took the whole speedo out of another car and that was from a reputable london dealer !
There is another well known SL dealer whose stock has "always been garaged"..thats all of them! I dont know, its a problem. I didnt see the pictures of the car on ebay but I think ebay is really tricky these days. I have had a few things recently that have been far from as described.! As far as Im concerned "untouched original" could mean anything. Mine has been touched all right but its like a house, you do a bit, keep it upright, move. Someone else does the same and the house stays up. Im sure that there are lots of bits of my house that are not original..etc etc etc

quote:Originally posted by Longtooth

When somebody says "UNTOUCHED ORIGINAL ", then shows pics of the interior dash, door panels with no pockets, and trunk (did you get a load of that wheel cover in the trunk???!!!!, padded A/C, all of which make it look like an overstuffed camel... and not only was the steering wheel pad redone, but so is ashtray cover...  you have to walk away.  If you look carefully at the front seat & dash pics you'll see a remarkable level of reflection from radio speaker wood and edge of the dash wood... so the wood's not original by any stretch.

Then there's the 38k milage... so what did this driver do... let the car sit in the garage most of it's lifetime?  We're talking '70 thur '06... 36 years... that's a tad over 1k miles/year on average... or an average of 87 miles/mo?  

There are other tell-tales in the description... no mention of matching numbers, for example... the Options list a cassette player... not in the 'original' Becker, so where is it?  In the glove compartment?... stuck in the platform behind the seats?

And are those the original white-walls?  38k miles and 36 year old tires that sat for most of it's life without revolving?

Not that the car doesn't look good... body looks great, chome that can be seen looks good and is complete...what's with the radio antenna though... it's sticking up about 12" like it's either not fully extended, or more likely not the original type antenna.  Floor matts do look in great condition... but that trunk!!! Ughliiiiii!

Despite the appearance of body/chrome, the write-up is pure unadulterated, unabased hype, dare I say outright lies, intended for a newbie that hasn't got a clue about what he / she may be buying... so why would anybody buy a car that's obviously not as it's being described unless the buyer didn't know that the car isn't as it's being described in fact?  If you can't believe the write-up, what makes anybody think they can believe anything about the car's looks & condition, or whether panels or hoods have been replaced or not.

Longtooth
67 250SL US #113-043-10-002163
'02 SL500 Sport

Nick350
r107 SL red