Advertising Last completed movie pages 1962 Mercedes-Benz 300 SE [W112]Class: Cars, Sedan — Model origin: 
![1962 Mercedes-Benz 300 SE [W112]](/i390545.jpg)
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Background vehicle
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2011-04-15 11:13 |
I believe this is a W 112 1961-65 Mercedes 300 SE. The reason why is because it has a side strip which the 220/230, to my knowledge, didn't have. I don't think this is long enough to be a 300 SEL. (L = Lang, German for "long") |
|
◊ 2011-04-15 11:38 |
I'm not so sure about that... The 220 S [W111] also had that side strip, and a 300 SE would have had a horizontal strip from the top of the rear wheel arch upto the rear end of the car, and that strip doesn'y seem to be here... |
|
◊ 2011-04-15 12:23 |
Are you sure about that, because I haven't found any 220/230, that for sure isn't a 300, on the internet, with a side strip. If you're right this will be wrong as well /vehicle_97408-Mercedes-Benz-220-SE-W111-1960.html . And here's a comparaison between some models http://www.leoemm.com/benz_55til85.htm (2/3 down, from a 1965 brouchure I think) Or is the side strip a trick of light...? -- Last edit: 2011-04-15 12:27:14 |
|
◊ 2011-04-15 15:58 |
Could be a trick of light. Statistically far more likely to be a 220S, a common car in post 1965 Bucharest (as they were imported for use by the State elite). |
|
◊ 2011-04-15 17:23 |
I guess I wrote my comment too early, this morning... No side trim indeed on the 220 S. But still I miss the strip behind the rear wheel arch. So I'd guess it is rather a 220 S (or SE) with an aftermarket side strip (or just a reflection on the side moulding). |
|
◊ 2011-04-15 23:39 |
It isn't easy to tell, either if it has a side strip or not, or if it has the strip behind the wheel arch. Please take a look at this link for the same angle http://www.flickriver.com/photos/coopey/4006397032/ . |
|
◊ 2011-04-16 11:22 |
Is that side strip going all the way to the front lights? (unlike the one shown in the movie)... |
|
◊ 2011-04-16 12:11 |
Perhaps you're right about it being a W 111 instead? Too bad the picture is blurry... |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
