Any downside to adjusting the shift cale linkage on my 420 with no play?

[Ascension]

Any downside to adjusting the shift cable linkage on my 420 with no play?

With the long legged gear and peaky power band of the 4.2 in the E420 like the slightly longer gear holds and quicker down shifts. What I am talking about is sliding the adjustment back to have no play before contact with the trans linkage. The way I have it now sits lightly on the stop and as the throttle opens with the pedal the linkage is also moving the bowden cable with no delay. Only slightly miss aligns the arrows but seems to crisp up trans response a good bit at really light throttle.

 

[jhodg5ck]

Re: Any downside to adjusting the shift cable linkage on my 420 with no play?

Nope, sounds like a good way to be! Fwiw, 420's really love a 2.82 rear...

Jono

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[jhodg5ck]

Re: Any downside to adjusting the shift cable linkage on my 420 with no play?

And yes, a 2.24 is great in a 500e. I think MB had their ratios backwards IMHO.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[Ascension]

Re: Any downside to adjusting the shift cable linkage on my 420 with no play?

Nope, sounds like a good way to be! Fwiw, 420's really love a 2.82 rear...

Jono

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

First off thank for responding here. Trust your opinion on trans issues more than most!
Could really see this on the 2.82 as the power band of the 4.2 is up higher than the 5.0 so can really use more gear. Not as bad on the bottom as the 1970 Boss 302 mustang I had at one time (BIG port Cleveland heads on a little 5.0 liter 302 = NO bottom end but once on the "cam" ) but--.

 

[Ascension]

Re: Any downside to adjusting the shift cable linkage on my 420 with no play?

And yes, a 2.24 is great in a 500e. I think MB had their ratios backwards IMHO.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

AGREED!!