Talk:Mercedes-Benz W140

I find the information in correct as far as the s600 they say it was 1998 first year for s600 then in 1998 changed class, I owed a 1997 s600 2 door, armored, so the s600 was out before 1998 although it was man made not assembly line — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophisticated badgirl (talk • contribs) 14:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Neutrality of Diana's Death Section

It seems like it is defending Mercedes rather than just stating the facts. ie. wouldn't alcohol affect whether or not the car crashes, not whether people survive after has crashed? Hullo exclamation mark (talk) 11:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I went to this discussion page simply because of reading the blatant bias and "Mercedes defense" of that section. 65 mph impact is not an excessive speed (pretty standard for roadways actually. I suggest deletion of the whole section. 65.196.126.11 (talk) 22:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Clarity required

The safety section says "The V8 and V12 W140 models distributed more braking power to the rear wheels, increasing stopping effectiveness.", which sounds rather counter intuitive. Is this correct or poor wording? Considering that the large amount of the vehicles mass is transferred to the front under heavy braking, it seems highly unlikely to me that more is sent to the back. Maybe that sentence is supposed to be telling us that the bias, when compared to other versions, is different? Yevad (talk) 12:17, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Mercedes has published regarding the braking system: "By distributing more braking power to the rear wheels, it was possible to improve the fade resistance of the brake system and reduce wear to the front wheel brakes" from https://media.daimler.com/marsMediaSite/en/instance/ko/Mercedes-Benz-S-Class-W-140-series-1991-to-1998.xhtml?oid=9273051 --Crimescrutineer (talk) 06:59, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mercedes-Benz W140. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141230184646/http://www.daimler.com/Projects/c2c/channel/documents/1892377_CL_Klasse_e_2010.pdf to http://www.daimler.com/Projects/c2c/channel/documents/1892377_CL_Klasse_e_2010.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mercedes-Benz W140. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131110144551/http://www.datsc.com/blog/2013/07/02/w140-speed-limiter-on-the-mercedes-s600-with-m120-engine/ to http://www.datsc.com/blog/2013/07/02/w140-speed-limiter-on-the-mercedes-s600-with-m120-engine/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:56, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Lexus LS 400 Rumor

I really do not believe that item from Motor Trend has any place in this article. It is purely hyperbole, made up by automotive journalist taking a guess at what he thinks Mercedes-Benz did with the W140 program, to "rival" the 1990 Lexus LS 400.

Truth is, I already put the correct story in this article, that 90% of the W140 delays were ordered in 1987 by the chief engineer, well before the Lexus brand fully went public. Let alone showcasing the LS 400, which was still a finished clay model, not even in metal and hidden within Toyota HQ grounds.

I do not want anyone adding that back to the article (like User: Arado did on Jan 3, 2015), as it is not accurate and contradicts existing text within the article. It is purely hearsay, with no direct quotes from MB personnel nor insiders supporting it. Angus Mackenzie has never been an employee of MB nor did he directly reference anything, that can be read as definitively what occurred with the W140 program.

Just because a journalist from seemingly reputable source writes something, doesn't make it accurate or factual, especially if no referenced account of actual activies was given. It is mostly his job to review cars, not do marketing for a brand or telling their model's full back story piece-by-piece in fully detailed accuracy.

This conjecture is the same way I see journalists lazily hypothesizing that auto show concepts are the direct basis or inspiration of upcoming production cars or redesigns, when often it is simply a latter stage prototype of the final production model's design cloaked in some additional cladding or styling gimmicks to throw off the public temporarily. Then many individuals are quick to add that to Wikipedia as fact and create a misleading narrative, which poorly influences readers of an article.

Please look at sources more discriminately and not fall so easily for any write-up, that can be laden with fallacies. With that being said, I am a great fan of Arado's work online, but just disagree with the re-addition of that Lexus fallacy.--Carmaker1 (talk) 09:26, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Yea with 1987 being when the delays began, if they were in response to anything it would be the BMW E32. Toasted Meter (talk) 23:32, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Recent Edits

I am seeing a lot of inconsistencies and fallacies regarding W140 launch and that of history about it. A user named OliverTwist or similar has introduced a barrage of inaccurate content that I'm going to have to reedit, a massive headache in itself on a mobile device.
I really don't want to see again in this article anything related to Lexus, based on an unfounded Motor Trend rumor. No one outside of Motor Trend has ever truly confirmed that Mercedes-Benz even based their decision-making on the LS400 to add certain extras.
I removed that information in this article on August 25, 2012 and again in 2018, plus just now. It should stay that way. I really expect people to be smarter than that in terms of deciphering what journalists are credible about or alternatively making up as they go along.--Carmaker1 (talk) 18:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

S600 & AMG Section removal 12:47, 26 November 2019‎

While I agree that a lot of the information in this section was unsubstantiated, especially regarding the comparison with the first-generation S63 AMG, it also contained valuable information regarding the performance characteristics of the V12 model and correctly asserted that it was a performance milestone upon release (https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a33967090/tested-1992-mercedes-benz-600sel/ "stupendous performance numbers" "mammoth powerplant hurtles the 600SEL"). The AMG models were also made by Mercedes in collaboration with AMG, just as the R129 SL 70, SL 73, etc. were, but no longer are mentioned in the article, despite the 7.3L M297 still being listed under the engines list. This valuable information may not have the ironclad source material of other AMG models given the notoriously-poor record keeping of AMG during the 1990s, but merit inclusion in the article. Thank you. 2600:1700:50B1:72B0:B59E:C747:47EE:8075 (talk) 11:23, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Incorrect power ratings

Due to the way that Wikipedia seems to like using automatic conversions of units to produce the various power figures, those figures are sometimes off, as is the case here.

It is widely documented that early M120s make 402 horsepower (as published by Mercedes-Benz) and the rest make 389 horsepower (as prior source). These figures are also stated on the M120 Wikipedia page and the R129 SL Wikipedia page (a car that shares the engine). In this article, they are rounded to 400 and 390. Perhaps we ought to value the correct figures on the W140 page as well instead of holding to a method that produces an incorrect result. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:50B1:72B0:19CA:7872:21CD:DB7D (talk) 05:35, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Whoever added the conversion template forgot to set the rounding correctly. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  16:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the correction, I appreciate the quick contribution of someone who knows how the systems work. 2600:1700:50B1:72B0:65D2:F5C:3A69:9A51 (talk) 01:07, 15 July 2021 (UTC)