THE STATUS SYMBOL
The Mercedes R107, which bowed in 1971 as the 350SL, was an obvious and logical extension of the W113’s basic concept: bigger, heavier, and more modern inside and out, with new features like integral air conditioning. A V8 engine was now standard — the 3,499 cc (214 cu. in.) M116 for non-U.S. markets, the low-compression 4,520 cc (276 cu. in.) M117 for the confusingly badged American 350SL 4.5 — and U.S. cars came standard with a new and much smoother three-speed torque converter automatic. (The six-cylinder 280SL would be revived in some markets after the OPEC embargo, this time powered by a DOHC 2,746 cc (168 cu. in.) engine.)
Aesthetically, the R107 fell short of the W113’s uncluttered elegance, but the design had legs, surviving through 1989 in a bewildering number of variations. Its performance waxed and waned over the years, seldom with any great impact on its popularity. Like the Pagoda, it could be driven in a sports-car-like manner without embarrassing itself, but canyon-carving wasn’t really the point. We suspect that many buyers were attracted to the SL because it was rakish enough to earn envious stares at the country club or valet stand, but didn’t ask its owner to suffer for the privilege. The SL was not the sexiest or most exciting two-seater, but it gave away nothing to any competitor when it came to luxury or prestige.
Although the Mercedes W113 is commonly known as the “Pagoda,” the distinctive hardtop was also adapted for the R107 roadster, seen here in U.S. 450SL form. Although all U.S. R107s through 1980 used a 4,520 cc (276 cu. in.) V8, first-year federalized cars were badged 350SL 4.5, which was renamed 450SL the following year.
The SL-Class, as Mercedes now calls these cars, has remained true to that formula for 50 years, with great and undoubtedly lucrative success. Although the SL’s role has become clearer over time, there have been surprisingly few direct imitators, the most obvious probably being the Cadillac Allanté and XLR. Of course, there have been numerous sporty, luxurious coupes, like the BMW 6-Series and Jaguar XJ-S and XK, but those are closed four-seaters (which Mercedes also has), and not really the same thing. Given the stature and longevity of the SL, rivals may be missing a bet.
Still, the SL Class might never have gotten off the ground if the W113 had not been so adroitly executed. Its styling has aged remarkably well; while it obviously doesn’t look like a modern car, its purposeful simplicity and lack of ostentation still do it credit. It isn’t cheap to run, repair, or restore, but the W113 was built to last, and it’s better suited to modern traffic than many of its contemporaries. The term “classic” has been much abused in recent years, but we think the W113 is among the handful of postwar cars that can wear that label without irony.
NOTES ON SOURCES
Our sources included “Autocar road test 1998: Mercedes-Benz 300SE l.w.b.,” The Autocar 30 October 1964: 918-922; The Auto Editors of Consumer Guide, “1955-1963 Mercedes-Benz 190SL,” HowStuffWorks.com, 18 September 2007, auto.howstuffworks. com/ 1955-1963- mercedes-benz-190sl.htm, accessed 12 February 2013, and “Mercedes-Benz Sports Cars,” HowStuffWorks.com, 1 June 2007, auto.howstuffworks. com/ mercedes-benz-sports-cars.htm, accessed 5 February 2013; “Autos Abroad,” Car Life May 1963, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2010), p. 35; “Autotest: Mercedes-Benz 280SL (2,778 c.c.),” Autocar 3 September 1970, reprinted in ibid, pp. 144-148; “Autotest: Mercedes-Benz 280SE automatic,” Autocar 18 June 1970, reprinted in Mercedes-Benz S Class & 600 Limited Edition 1965-1972, ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2006), pp. 76-80; Béla Barényi, “Motor Car Formed From a Base and a Top Section,” U.S. Patent No. 2,723,154, filed 7 January 1950, issued 8 November 1955, and assignor to Daimler-Benz AG, “Vehicle Top Structure,” U.S. Patent No. 3,233,937, filed 19 March 1963, issued 8 February 1966; Hansjörg Bendel, “Mercedes 230SL,” Road & Track Vol. 14, No. 10 (June 1963), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 19-22; Stuart Bladon, “Road Impressions: Day out with the new Mercedes V8,” Autocar 2 April 1970, reprinted in Mercedes-Benz S Class & 600 Limited Edition 1965-1972, ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2006), p. 81; Martin Buckley, “Mercedes, Meet thy maker,” Classic & Sports Car August 2009, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 177-181; Bernard Cahier, “Road Test/10-63: Mercedes-Benz 230 SL,” Sports Car Graphic May 1963, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 31-34; Simon Charlesworth, “Restrained Decadence,” Classic Cars November 2008, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 182-188; Mike Covello, Standard Catalog of Imported Cars 1946-2002, Second Edition (Iola, WI: Krause Publications, 2001); Daimler AG, “A stylist with a strong sense of aesthetics and proportion: Friedrich Geiger” [press release], 28 March 2012; “Historical SLs in the wind tunnel” [press release], 18 June 2012, “Master of SL design: Bruno Sacco” [press release], 28 March 2012; “Mercedes-Benz, model range W 113, with eight-cylinder engine” [press release], 26 March 2012; “Mercedes-Benz SL, W113 series – the first sports car with a safety body” [press release], 26 March 2012; “The design of the Mercedes-Benz SL-Class” [press release], 28 March 2012; “The motor sport history of Mercedes-Benz” [press release]; “The rotary piston engine in Mercedes-Benz SL W113 and R107 experimental vehicles” [press release], 26 March 2012; and “Two biographies: Richard Seaman and Rudolf Uhlenhaut” [press release], 13 June 2007, media.daimler. com, accessed 14 February to 10 April 2013; “Prof. Dr.-Ing. h.c. Fritz Nallinger (Members of the Board of Management), n.d., www.daimler. com, accessed 10 April 2013, Daimler-Benz AG, “Mercedes-Benz Preisliste Nr. 3 für Personenwagen,” May 1964; “Mercedes-Benz Preisliste Nr. 14 für Personenwagen,” September 1963; and “Mercedes-Benz Preisliste Nr. 20 für Personenwagen,” May 1968; Richard Dredge, “Buying Guide: Mercedes ‘Pagoda’ 230-280SL 1963-1971,” Octane July 2008, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 189-192; Gavin Farmer, “1955-1963 Mercedes-Benz 190SL: Stuttgart’s Lost Classic,” Collectible Automobile Vol. 17. No. 5 (February 2001): 26-37; Gregor Gant, “Mercedes-Benz 230SL,” Autosport 18 September 1964, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 50-51; “Giant test: Fiat 2300S v. Mercedes 230SL,” Car December 1965, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 84-88; “Group Test No. 7: Extravagant two seaters,” Motor 7 September 1968, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 113-119; Andy Halibery, “Rudolf Uhlenhaut: Supreme engineer,” Motor Sport Retro, 10 April 2012, www.motorsportretro. com, accessed 14 February 2013; John Heilig, Mercedes-Benz SL (Sports Car Color History) (Osceola, WI: MBI Publishing Company, 1997); Martin Holmes, “Tony Ambrose: Champion rally co-driver,” The Independent, 26 January 2008, www.independent. co. uk, accessed 10 April 2013; Geoffrey Howard, “Getaway Merc,” Autocar 9 May 1968, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 100-101; “In memoriam Karl Wilfert,” Auto Motor und Sport 7/1976 (27 March 1976); International Money Fund, “Cooperation and reconstruction (1944–1971)” and “The end of the Bretton Woods System (1972–1981),” About the IMF: History, N.d., www.imf. org, last accessed 2 April 2014; John Katz, “1971 Mercedes-Benz 280 SL: Civilized Sports Car,” Special Interest Autos #162 (November-December 1997): 10-15, 56-58; Beverly Rae Kimes, The Star and the Laurel: The Centennial History of Daimler, Mercedes and Benz 1886-1986 (Montvale, NJ: Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc., 1986); Tom Klockau, “Curbside Classic: 1963 Mercedes-Benz 230SL – Big Shoes to Fill,” Curbside Classic, 7 September 2012, www.curbsideclassic.com/ curbside-classics-european/ curbside-classic- 1963-mercedes-benz-230sl -big-shoes-to-fill/, accessed 13 February 2013; Bernd. S. Koehling, “The Mercedes Pagoda SL,” Squidoo, www.squidoo. com/ history-of-mercedes- the-pagoda-sl, accessed 14 February 2013, and “The MERCEDES Pagoda SL,” 2012, www.benz-books. com/ mercedes_history _230sl_w113.html, accessed 14 February 2013; Brian Long, Mercedes SL W113 Series (Dorchester, England: Veloce Publishing Plc., 2011), and Mercedes-Benz SL and SLC 107 Series, 1971 to 1989 (Dorchester, England: Veloce Publishing Plc., 2010); Karl Ludvigsen, “Mercedes Builds a Brain Box,” Car and Driver Vol. 7, No. 6 (December 1961): 40-41, 89; Tom McCahill, “The Mercedes-Benz 190 SL,” Mechanix Illustrated April 1956, pp. 98-101, 202, and “Mercedes-Benz 230SL,” Mechanix Illustrated August 1965, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 74-75; “Mercedes,” Road Test January 1971, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, p. 157; “Mercedes Benz,” Motor 24 June 1967, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, p. 95; “Mercedes-Benz 190SL Roadster (121) Technical Specifications,” Unique Cars and Parts, n.d., www.uniquecarsandparts. com.au, accessed 13 February 2013; “Mercedes-Benz 230-SL,” Car and Driver Vol. 8, No. 12 (June 1963), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 24-30; “Mercedes-Benz 230-SL,” Car and Driver 1966, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, p. 79; “Mercedes-Benz 230SL 2,306 c.c.,” The Autocar 4 September 1964, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 38-42; “Mercedes-Benz 230-SL Automatic,” Road & Track Vol. 17, No. 4 (November 1965), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 61-64; “Mercedes-Benz 230SL Automatic 2,306 c.c.,” The Autocar 2 October 1964, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 43-45; “Mercedes-Benz 230SL (113) Technical Specifications,” Unique Cars and Parts, n.d., www.uniquecarsandparts. com.au, accessed 13 February 2013; “Mercedes-Benz 250SL,” Car and Driver Vol. 13, No. 2 (August 1967), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 90-94; “Mercedes-Benz 250SL,” Car South Africa May 1967, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, p. 99; “Mercedes Benz 250SL,” Foreign Car Guide December 1967, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 102-105; “Mercedes-Benz 250SL,” Road & Track Vol. 18, No. 9 (May 1967), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, p. 89; “Mercedes-Benz 250SL (113 A) Technical Specifications,” Unique Cars and Parts, n.d., www.uniquecarsandparts. com.au, accessed 13 February 2013; “Mercedes-Benz 280SL,” Popular Imported Cars March 1971, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 165-170; “Mercedes-Benz 280 SL,” Road & Track Vol. 19, No. 12 (August 1968), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 109-112; “Mercedes-Benz 280SL (113 E28) Technical Specifications,” Unique Cars and Parts, n.d., www.uniquecarsandparts. com.au, accessed 14 February 2013; “Mercedes 250 SL,” Road Test 1968, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 129-131; “Mercedes 280 SL,” Road Test 1968, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 141-143; “Mercedes 280 SL,” Road Test January 1970, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 154-156; “Mercedes S-Type,” Popular Classics June 1991, reprinted in Mercedes-Benz S Class & 600 Limited Edition 1965-1972, ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2006), pp. 130-131; Laurence Meredith, Original Mercedes SL (Bideford, Devon: Bay View Books/MBI Publishing Company, 1996); “New ‘upper class’ Mercedes,” Motor 14 August 1965, reprinted in Mercedes-Benz S Class & 600 Limited Edition 1965-1972, ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2006), pp. 6-8; “1963-1971 Mercedes-Benz 230SL, 250SL & 280SL,” Road & Track Vol. 37, No. 3 (October 1985), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, p. 171; Eric Nielssen, “Six Luxury Cars: a view from the Automotive Engineering Side,” Car and Driver Vol. 11, No. 1 (July 1965), 26–31, 62–65, 75; Andrew Noakes, “Beauty and the Best,” Classic & Sports Car August 2006, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 172-176; Jan P. Norbye and the Auto Editors of Consumer Guide, BMW: Bavaria’s Driving Machines (Skokie, IL: Publications International, Ltd., 1984); David Owen, “Star Performer: 230SL,” World’s Faster Sports Cars 1965, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 52-55; John R. Olsen, ed., Collecting the Mercedes-Benz SL 1954-1993 (Minneapolis, MN: The SL Market Letter, Inc., 1993); Pagoda SL Group Technical Manual, www.sl113. org/ wiki/, accessed 13 February 2013; Simon Read, “Tales of the 300SL,” Automobile Quarterly’s Great Cars & Grand Marques, ed. Beverly Rae Kimes (Princeton, NJ: Automobile Quarterly/Bonanza Books, 1979), pp. 88-97; André Ritzinger, “Mercedes 190SL 1955-1963,” RitzSite, n.d., www.ritzsite. nl/ 190SL/ 01_190SL.htm, accessed 12 February 2013, “Mercedes 300 SL 1952-1963,” RitzSite, n.d., www.ritzsite. nl/300SL/01_300SL.htm, accessed 12 February 2013, and “Mercedes 280 SL – 1968,” RitzSite, n.d., www.ritzsite. demon.nl/ 280SL/ MB280SL.htm, accessed 12 February 2013; André Ritzinger and Naj Jesani, “1964 Mercedes 230 SL Pininfarina coupe: the mystery car,” RitzSite, n.d., www.ritzsite. demon.nl/ 230SLPF/ 01_SLPF.htm, accessed 12 February 2013; André Ritzinger and Derek Jettmar, “Modified 1968 Mercedes 280 SL: 6.3 litre muscle car,” RitzSite, n.d., www.ritzsite. nl/ 280SL63/ 01_SL63.htm, accessed 12 February 2013; “Road & Track Comparison Test: Four Luxury GTs,” Road & Track Vol. 20, No. 10 (June 1969), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 134-139; “Road Test: Mercedes-Benz 230SL,” Sporting Motorist August 1965, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 76-78; “Road Test: Mercedes-Benz 250SL,” Sports Car Graphic August 1967, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 96-98; “Road Test No. 23/65: Mercedes-Benz 230SL,” Motor 5 June 1965, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 56-60; “Road Test — The Mercedes-Benz 230SL,” Motor Sport June 1965, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 65-67; Bill Sanders, “Mercedes-Benz 280 SL: The Limousine Sports Car,” Motor Trend Vol. 20, No. 10 (October 1968), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 132-133; Rainer W. Schlegelmilch and Hartmut Lehbrink, Mercedes (Cologne, Germany: Könemann VG mbH, 1997); Eberhard Seifert, “A New Star: Mercedes 230-SL,” Road & Track Vol. 14, No. 9 (May 1963), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 6-8; Jerry Sloniger, “Mercedes Benz 280 SL,” Foreign Car Guide October 1968, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 122-123, and “Most Mercurial Merc,” Wheels October 1968, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 126-128; Heinz Thiemann, “Two Surprises from Stuttgart,” Sports Car World May 1963, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 11-13; Bill Tuckey, “The Mighty Mercedes 230SL,” Sports Car World April 1965, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 68-72; “Two from the Top,” The Autocar 29 March 1963, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 14-16; “230SL Appetizer,” Sporting Motorist March 1965, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, p. 49; “230SL Replaces the 190SL,” Motor 13 March 1963, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 9-10; “Type 230 SL Pagoda – Mercedes,” Oldtimer, n.d., weboldtimer. com, accessed 13 February 2013; “Used Car Test: 1968 Mercedes-Bezns 280SL automatic No. 335,” Autocar 14 October 1971, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 160-161; Maarten van Eijck, The Heckflosse Homepage, n.d., www.heckflosse. nl, accessed 14 February 2013; Ralph Vonderstein, Heckflosse, n.d., www.heckflosse. de, accessed 13 February 2013; Ron Wakefield, “Road & Track Owner Survey: 230/250/280SL Owner Survey,” Road & Track Vol. 21, No. 12 (August 1970), reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 149-153; Ian Webb, “Exoticars: Mercedes-Benz 280SL,” Custom Car December 1971, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 158-159; the Wikipedia® entries for the Bretton Woods (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system, accessed 8 April 2013); Bruno Sacco (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Sacco, accessed 14 February 2013), Friedrich Geiger (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Geiger, accessed 7 April 2013), Fritz Nallinger (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Nallinger, accessed 14 February 2013), Karl Wilfert (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Wilfert, accessed 14 February 2013), Mercedes-Benz 300SL (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W198, accessed 14 February 2013), Mercedes-Benz W113 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W113, accessed 12 February 2013) and the equivalent German Wikipedia page (de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W113, accessed 13 February 2013), the Mercedes-Benz W114 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W108, accessed 11 April 2013), the Mercedes-Benz M130 engine (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_M180_engine, accessed 9 February 2013), and Paul Bracq (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bracq, accessed 14 February 2013); Karl Wilfert and Béla Barényi, assignors to Daimler-Benz AG, “Vehicle Roof Convexly and Concavely Curved With Rim Therefor,” U.S. Patent No. 3,239,269, filed 25 September 1962, issued 8 March 1966; Gordon Wilkins, “A Flier from the Fatherland,” Sports Car World December 1963, reprinted in Mercedes 230SL – 250SL – 280SL Ultimate Portfolio 1963-1971, pp. 36-37; “W113, W111 Preisliste Nr. 8,” 24 January 1972, www.meinbenz. de, 12 March 2013; Jim Wright, “For the first time in history, the Corvette Sting Ray is …” Motor Trend Vol. 15, No. 5 (May 1963), reprinted in Corvette Sting Ray Gold Portfolio 1963-1967, ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 1990), pp. 18-23; Brock Yates, “Viewpoint: Mercedes-Benz 250,” Car and Driver Vol. 14, No. 2 (August 1968), reprinted in Mercedes-Benz S Class & 600 Limited Edition 1965-1972, ed. R.M. Clarke (Cobham, England: Brooklands Books Ltd., ca. 2006), 52-55; and an email to the author from Eric Buckle, 13 February 2013.
Some historical exchange rate data for the dollar and Deutschmark came from Lawrence H. Officer, “Exchange Rates Between the United States Dollar and Forty-one Currencies” (2011, MeasuringWorth, https://www.measuringworth.org/exchangeglobal/, used with permission). Exchange rate values cited in the text represent the approximate equivalency of German and U.S. currency at the time, not contemporary U.S. suggested retail prices, which are cited separately. Please note that all exchange rate equivalencies cited in the text are approximate and are offered solely for the reader’s general reference; this is an automotive history, not a treatise on currency trading or the value of money, and nothing in this article should be taken as financial advice of any kind!
RELATED STORIES
- Bucking the System: The 1963-1967 Corvette Sting Ray (C2)
- Little Bird: The 1955-1957 Ford Thunderbird
- Little Sister: The Mercedes 190SL
- The Perilous Success of the 1976 Cadillac Seville
- This Time, It’s Personal: The 1967-1970 Cadillac Eldorado
- Top Cat: The Jaguar E-Type
- Rock-Solid Snob Appeal: The Mercedes-Benz W111 and W112
Aaron,
Thanks for the mention as a source. Glad I could assist! As a former owner of a 190 Heckflosse, I really enjoyed the write-up!
Keep up the excellent work!
EB
Thanks for another good read.
In the second paragraph of the 250SL section is this line:
“…combined the 82mm (3.23-inch) stroke of the 230SL’s six with a longer 78.8mm (3.10-inch) stroke for a total displacement of 2,496 cc (152 cu. in.).”
You’ve got two numbers listed as the stroke. Am I correct in guessing the 82mm number is the bore of the engine?
Oops! Yes, that should have been "the 82mm (3.23-inch) bore."
Thanks for the correction — I’ve amended the text.
Thorough and judicious as always, you capture perfectly the virtues and drawbacks of the113 with a fine sense of historical context and the competition.
I may be wrong, but I believe the dark blue 230SL you show has replacement US headlight frames from a 280, with the much larger orange turn signal lens, instead of the narrow orange strip at the bottom–a not uncommon thing to see, as are replacement tail lights with orange blinkers, instead of the full red lenses. Not nit-picking here–in the eternal restorers’ debate between aesthetics and accuracy, I am an aesthete. I have a 67 pseudo-250SL: originally a 230 (as VIN indicates), but a replacement block from previous owner from a 250SE. He also put on a 250SL trunk badge, which is one of many hard-to-find-so-absurdly-expensive parts for 113’s. I’ve further mucked it up for purists by installing European headlight units on an originally US car, but they express the clean original Bracq design much better to my mind.
Market values for the 250SL (real, not pseudo, like mine) remain oddly less than one would think, given their short production run, and what at least some consider its combination of superior power to the 230 and lighter weight and less squishy suspension than the 280. The latter seems to have been modified with more of an eye to the US market, particularly in the increasing prevalence of automatics over manual gearboxes. With the 107 firmly aimed at American tastes, the manual all but vanished from US-spec models, and Mercedes certainly cashed in. There’s an interesting (arguably saddening) history to be written about the evolution of Mercedes in response to the US market, from the 70s to the present, as they’ve recalculated designs according to customer tastes, changing technology, and (perhaps most dramatically) the rise of Lexus in the 90s.
For all the drawbacks of the long throws, the engine noise from gearing ratios at high speed, and so forth–about which you’re spot-on–the manual in my 113 is so much fun to drive, and the exhaust note is wonderful (the sound of engineering, not “sound engineers” fiddling with the muffler or (laughably, to me) electronic tweaks to the stereo system, as in some new sports cars. The 113 as a whole can be a money-pit far beyond the 107, given the complexity of welded body work around the grill, hood, and fenders (none bolted on, as with 107’s); aluminum hood, trunk lid, doors, and use of metal instead of plastic in so many places (grill screen, dash, door sills, and on and on); complex, difficult-to-fit wood and other trim on the dash; literally countless grease fittings (and I do mean “literally” in the dictionary sense; even experts on SL forums seem to discover new ones); and antiquated rust-proofing on a body that seems designed to collect water rather than drain it in certain spots. The mechanical fuel injection needs adjustment beyond the skills of all but specialists, including MB dealers, and front-end body work is both expensive and, unless very well executed, will give itself away immediately in panel gaps around that lovely hood design. A 107 is a much saner and cheaper collector choice. But with a fairly well-sorted solid “driver,” by no means fully restored, I’ve never regretted getting my 113, which feels like a machine, not an appliance, yet is utterly easy to drive and rides better than many cars designed decades later. And the shape and proportions are to my eye almost perfect; next to it, the far-more-modern 107 sacrifices character for sleekness. In Dallas, I get happy waves from people who would never notice a 107 (which are all over the place) or a late-model SL that cost 5x what mine did to buy.
Apologies for self-indulgent response. And thanks again for your work!
Thanks, Rick! I think you’re right about the lights and have amended the caption. I was so distracted dealing with the paste-up (typing HTML img tags by hand — don’t ask) that I missed that.
I would be very curious to know how many European W113s of each generation had automatic. Based on the comparative U.S. and rest-of-world production figures and the various estimates I’ve seen for the percentage of cars with automatic, it can’t have only been American buyers opting for it. Still, the fact that the U.S. R107 was offered only with automatic is noteworthy.
For better or worse, the R107 is still too ubiquitous to really stand out. In this part of Los Angeles, it’s hard to go outside without seeing one and the longevity of the design means that it registers as an older car rather than an Old Car. (The C107 is considerably less common.)
On the fuel injection system, I suppose it’s only fair to point out that most mechanical injection systems of that time were similarly intolerant of shade-tree mechanics. On Triumph’s 2.5 PI engine, for instance, the factory service manual included stern warnings not to even try adjusting or resetting the metering unit’s diaphragm springs, which required very fine tolerances.
One would assume that since the R107 was offered only with automatic in the U.S., a majority of American W113 owners had ordered automatic. But there’s another wrinkle, which Road & Track mentioned in their first road test of the R107. Smog-certifying both manual and automatic R107’s for the U.S. would have been that much more expensive. Road & Track gave a figure (which I no longer remember) for the percentage of W113’s sold with automatic in the U.S. and said Daimler-Benz “had to go with the majority.”
As an indication of one demographic to which the W113 appealed, I read an article around the time the BMW 325 Cabriolet was introduced. The writer said that until the advent of the 325 Cabriolet, the W113 was really the only game in town for doctors’ wives.
To my eye the boxy look is fine on M-B sedans but not on the R107. The W113 is so much more graceful.
The separate emissions certification cost is a major reason why we no longer get a lot of cars with manual transmission even if they’re sold that way in other markets — or if we do, the manual actually costs more than the automatic. (That said, it’s interesting to note that some Japanese cars have been sold here with manual transmissions that weren’t offered in the home market.) In any case, the newer three-speed torque converter transmission was probably better suited to U.S. driving styles anyway, particularly with a V-8 engine.
I have a feeling the R107 was intended to look more “masculine.” I don’t recall offhand if the designers specifically said that (although they were certainly conscious that it was bigger and bulkier than the W113), but it would make sense from the results. I don’t know how the demographics of the R107 differed from those of the W113 overall, but at least in L.A., it seems the R107 had a fairly unisex appeal.
I think perceptions of the R107 end up being skewed somewhat by the model’s longevity. Its lifespan overlapped several generations of Mercedes-Benz sedans, each of which became progressively sleeker while the roadster stayed (at least visually) the same. Not that the R107 isn’t objectively bulkier and less graceful than the W113, but having viewed it against cars of the late ’80s as well as the ’70s, the effect is exaggerated.
This was a fascinating and quite comprehensive read. At the last Frankfurt Auto Show and more recently the Essen Techno Classica there were many W113s present. It is apparent their values are increasing, unlike the not particularly liked successor. A number of specialists here in Germany have taken to building cars that retain the 230-280SL styling but with modern Mercedes-Benz engines and transmissions. At an impressive price, of course!
i learned to drive on my dad’s ’71 280sl. only negatives were the automatic, 4.08 rear end (felt bad taking her on the interstate), heavy a/c that was never used, and the points constantly frying up.
love to do a resto-mod if the car would still sound the same. amazing exhaust note. perfect car for going to the golf course.
Thank you for this article. As I’ve only just discovered this website, I am very impressed with the thoroughness and depth that make this article a true gem. Very inspiring.
My grandmother bought a ’72 250C brand new, she kept it for 25 years, and I drove it a lot over that time. The comments on the Mercedes automatic transmission are so spot-on. If you drove it with just the right amount of partial throttle it shifted almost smoothly, anything else and it was jerking and slamming gears. Boy, I miss that car.
Did any of the early 1964 230 SL come with dual carbs instead of Bosch fuel injection.
Not from the factory, but since there were dual-carburetor versions of the 220 and 250 engines in the sedans, it seems entirely possible that someone might have done a swap for some reason.
Owner of 1970 250C …..motor swapped on 76′ to a 280 S/A…..yes yes stamped on the head is S/A ….definitely not a 8 ….block says 130 923 12 001641 …does anyone know this model ? Closest I could come was a 280S a/c or the 280 S/8
The Triumph Stag was aimed at more or less the same market segment as the W113 and R107. Unfortunately for the Stag, it was developed and introduced at a time of extreme dysfunction at British Leyland. It quickly acquired (and never really lost) a reputation for poor build quality and engine problems.
Thanks for that fine article. I recently purchased a 1963 MB 230SL
standard transmission. The car seems to be treated poorly at sometime during it’s past. The steering wheel cracked, the top of the ashtray is missing, but it is a fun car to drive, I am slowly bringing it back to good form. BTW, any idea where I can get a top to the ashtray? I fear that I might have to get it fabricated.
I’m afraid I can’t help with parts or repairs, sorry!
The Stag was a later car than the W113, and was an occasional 4 seater. Its main competitor , on the UK market a least , was the Reliant Scimitar GTC
All true. On the other hand, the W113 was one of the key inspirations for the Stag (whose development was quite protracted) and Triumph explicitly hoped to make the Stag that kind of car. Obviously, the Mercedes was a lot more expensive (and the R107 350SL was even more so), and Triumph didn’t have that kind of cachet, but that’s the sort of buyer they wanted to court.
Of course, it didn’t turn out that way, but massive disparities between intention and outcome are a central theme of the Stag story…!
Rather intrigued by the 115-134 hp 2.2-litre output of the M127 engine in the Mercedes-Benz W127 prototype, both it not being produced with neither it or the Mercedes-Benz W121 featuring a coupe bodystyle were missed opportunities.
Quite perplexed by the outputs of the M180 6-cylinder engine as find it difficult seeing capable of putting out 110 hp whereas the M127 was comfortably able to exceed those figures, also interested to know the M180 family’s relation to the larger M186 family.
The issue was pretty plainly torque, and in particular the shape of the torque curve. Torque output with normally aspirated engines is directly related to displacement. Many of the changes that will provide more horsepower from a given displacement either won’t produce a commensurate increase in torque. Some will actually hurt torque output or at least alter the torque curve in undesirable ways. The M127’s torque peak was 4,500 rpm, which was quite high for the time and forced some awkward compromises in gearing to compensate. In the heavier sedans and coupes, that would have been even worse.
It’s easy to lose sight of that issue when one becomes accustomed to modern engines, which are vastly more flexible. With modern engines, especially with forced induction, the torque peak doesn’t tell you much about the shape of the curve, whereas with early sixties technology, a torque peak above 4,000 rpm was likely to mean a very peaky, high-strung engine.
Can understand as way variations on the M180 were still used to some extent instead of the M127, just brings up the question of whether even further could have been extracted from the M180.
Like the idea of the Mercedes 190SL W121 receiving an 110 hp M180 or 115-134 hp M127 in W127 prototype form as a German equivalent to the Big Healey, which also switched from 4-cylinder to 6-cylinder engines.
Despite the potential compromises in refinement and tractability, is it known how much more power was capable of being extracted from the 105 hp 1.9-2.0 M121 4-cylinder engine or what it would have likely entailed?
I don’t have any details regarding what Nallinger tried in getting more power from the M121, but in that era, the steps involved in getting more power out of a given engine of given duration were generally straightforward: bigger ports, bigger valves, greater valve lift, longer duration, more carburetion. Not all of those are necessarily practical; for example, existing cylinder head design may impose limits on port size and shape, or oil system design may be inadequate for sustained high-rpm use. This makes your question more complicated than it might appear because some modifications may have required extensive and expensive design changes, such as new cylinder heads, for very modest improvements in power and significant cost to low-speed response.
The Big Healey is potentially a misleading comparison because the switch from the big four to the six was initially a matter of production economy rather than a product planning decision; the initial 100-6 lost some ground in performance. (It’s also significant there that the 2.6-liter C-series six was actually about 21 cc smaller than the big four!)
Read the M121 later M115 4-cylinder and the M180 family up to the M110 6-cylinder were related to each other (along with the dieselized 4/5-cylinder units), given the M121 and M180 engines shared history (and other related derivatives) it is strange the 6-cylinder was not capable of reaching 3-litres+.
In theory an 1897cc/1988cc 4-cylinder M121/M115 of similar spec to the 134 hp 2196cc M123 or 168 hp 2778cc M130 have a potential output of 115-116 hp (1897cc) and 120-121 hp (1988cc) for an alternate 190SL W121. Meanwhile using the much later 182 hp 2749cc M110 Twin-Cam as a rough guide equates to a potential 1988cc 4-cylinder output of 132 hp.
Brought up the Big Healey comparison because it immediately comes to mind even if the background for it differed from the W121 and W127 prototype.
I can’t claim to be sufficiently familiar with the fine details of Mercedes engines to tell you how closely their four- and six-cylinder engines of this vintage relate to one another. However, comparing specific outputs the way you’re doing is potentially misleading. A six-cylinder engine has a number of intrinsic advantages, including in breathing, and if the engines are part of the same family, the six will also have greater displacement and thus more torque. Even for engines of identical displacement, the four will need significantly bigger valves to match the total valve area of the six, which the standard port design might not easily accommodate, and would need greater valve lift and longer duration to compensate, hurting low-end response.
My suspicion — which again I’m not familiar enough with the engine development saga to confirm — is that porting ended up being a limiting factor for the M121. Small ports have advantages; they tend to give better low-end torque because you have greater intake velocity at low rpm, and they allow the head to be physically smaller. They obviously become a bottleneck when it comes to extracting more power, but if you have a closely related small-displacement six, that may not seem like a significant problem. However, if you want to get more power out of the four, the port design may leave you boxed in, wrestling with questions like whether it’s worth the cost to completely redesign the head for a gain of a few horsepower.
As for the displacement, I don’t think that one should assume an engine not being expanded beyond a particular threshold meant that it wasn’t capable of being expanded that far. The 2.8-liter threshold was a pretty hard limit in terms of taxation in some markets, like France, and Mercedes-Benz wasn’t yet centering the U.S. market in their product planning decisions. They may well have said, “We’ve already got a 3-liter engine for the few applications that need it,” and left it at that.