Subframe Rear Bushings

[JCM1]

Hi All:
I'm in the process of replacing all of the worn out suspension bushings and mounts for my 1992 500E. I have been advised that the subframe rear bushing P/N 124 351 02 42 is NLA. I'd lie to know if P/N 129 351 14 42 is an acceptable replacement. The part looks like it will fit but might be a bit lighter than the original although the original is badly squished/distorted.


Thanks in advance!


Joe

 

[Kyiv]

You're not cool with using Lemforder?

 

[gsxr]

129-351-14-42 supercedes to 202-351-09-42 and both are NLA.

124-351-02-42 is the "standard" bushing (not 500E/Sportline) and should be available from MB, although Lemforder ahould be ok as well.

 

[gerryvz]

If you get Lemforder, you will receive the MB part with the star ground off. Look at the set I just sold earlier this week.

 

[emerydc8]

I'm not sure why, but when I replaced the second set of subframe rear bushings (the large ones) over the weekend, the inner diameter of the bushings Naperville sent didnt need to be drilled out with a 1/2" drill to fit the threads of the Miller bushing removal tool like my other E420 bushings. Nor did the existing rear bushings need to be drilled to 1/2".

I didn't bother to check the part numbers and just presumed that they would send me the same bushings as before (they are listed as the same on both orders -- 124 350 04 41), but the holes on the ones that came off and the ones I installed are definitely larger than the ones on my other car.

 

[Jlaa]

129-351-14-42 supercedes to 202-351-09-42 and both are NLA.

124-351-02-42 is the "standard" bushing (not 500E/Sportline) and should be available from MB, although Lemforder ahould be ok as well.

Wait a sec ... can I clarify this .... do you mean 129-351-14-42 / 202-351-09-42 is the proper rear subframe REAR bushing, for the w124.036, and neither MB nor Lemfoerder are available?? Wtf?? And people are using the regular pedestrian rear subframe REAR bushing??? Huh??

Is 202-350-34-08 acceptable for the 124.036? This is a bushing for the C43AMG, see here, post #8: Rear Subframe mounting

EDIT - comparison of the two are shown in EPC below:

 

[gerryvz]

@Jlaa That is correct. The "Sportline" (beefier) bushing that fits the rear-most subframe mounts, is NLA from MB or aftermarket sources, necessitating a "pedestrian" W124 rear subframe rear bushing. It fits and works just fine, but may not be as stiff as the original Sportline bushing that came on the car. Sad state of affairs, but perhaps not the end of the world to be honest.

 

[Jlaa]

I'm not sure why, but when I replaced the second set of subframe rear bushings (the large ones) over the weekend, the inner diameter of the bushings Naperville sent didnt need to be drilled out with a 1/2" drill to fit the threads of the Miller bushing removal tool like my other E420 bushings. Nor did the existing rear bushings need to be drilled to 1/2".

I didn't bother to check the part numbers and just presumed that they would send me the same bushings as before (they are listed as the same on both orders -- 124 350 04 41), but the holes on the ones that came off and the ones I installed are definitely larger than the ones on my other car.

Does your pic show the rear subframe REAR bushing or rear subframe FRONT bushing? 124 350 04 41 is the rs FRONT bushing, but @JCM1 is asking about the rs REAR bushing .....?

 

[gsxr]

Wait a sec ... can I clarify this .... do you mean 129-351-14-42 / 202-351-09-42 is the proper rear subframe REAR bushing, for the w124.036, and neither MB nor Lemfoerder are available?? Wtf?? And people are using the regular pedestrian rear subframe REAR bushing??? Huh??

That is correct. Welcome to pedestria.

Does your pic show the rear subframe REAR bushing or rear subframe FRONT bushing? 124 350 04 41 is the rs FRONT bushing, but @JCM1 is asking about the rs REAR bushing .....?

The photo Jon posted was of the rear / large "pedestrian" bushings.

Is 202-350-34-08 acceptable for the 124.036? This is a bushing for the C43AMG, see here, post #8: Rear Subframe mounting

Excellent question, Watson! I'd say it's worth further investigation. Do standard W202 use any p/n that interchanges with any 124/129/201 chassis? If so, the bushing should physically fit, and MAY be closer to the NLA "Sportline" type we want on the E500E.

 

[Jlaa]

Excellent question, Watson! I'd say it's worth further investigation. Do standard W202 use any p/n that interchanges with any 124/129/201 chassis? If so, the bushing should physically fit, and MAY be closer to the NLA "Sportline" type we want on the E500E.

Challenge accepted. Our challenge is to find a rear-subframe REAR bushing for the E500E that is closer in "hardness" to the original than the pedestrian rear-subframe RARE bushing.

So far I have found that the rear-subframe FRONT bushing is interchangeable between many R208/w201/w202/w124 cars ..... but alas this is not the rear-subframe REAR bushing....

 

[gsxr]

Yeah, we got hosed on the front/smaller bushings as well. The p/n of the kit remained the same but MB changed the contents, they now supply the 'standard', short-tab bushings instead of the correct tall-tab bushings. The tall-tab version is NLA as of a few years ago. Pics of both are here.

 

[Jlaa]

As well, when I approach the issue from the reverse direction and I look up 202-350-34-08, which is a rear-subframe REAR bushing kit (includes bushing, washer, bolt) for the w202 AMG C43 (and other w202s as well) I find the below:



Notice the reference that this part supersedes a 124-chassis part ---- 124-350-65-08.
But what is 124-350-65-08? I look it up in the EPC and I see that this part is used only on w201 cars. Huh? The w201 was released BEFORE the w124.

Maybe my EPC is too new, and the 124-350-65-08 is an old part number that my new-ish EPC no longer shows to which 124 chassis this part is applicable to.

Does anyone have an older information source where they can find what 124-350-65-08 is (in relation to w124s)?



I note that this part in the EPC, is used on the 190E 2.5-16 EVO (Yes the 2.5, not the 2.3).

 

[gerryvz]

You really need to get down and current, with the Pee-Pee system, not the static/old EPC running on Java/Winblows. The Pee-Pee runs on any platform with a browser.

 

[gsxr]

Guhhhh. Gerry, the XPISS system doesn't have any newer/better info on 30 year old chassis. They very, very rarely update the old stuff anymore.

Ye Olde EPC has the advantage of running standalone without an internet connection, and is very fast when run on native Windoze (7 or 10). If there was any major advantage of XPISS, I'd go there, but to date I haven't heard it offers anything I can't live without.

 

[gsxr]

As well, when I approach the issue from the reverse direction and I look up 202-350-34-08, which is a rear-subframe REAR bushing kit (includes bushing, washer, bolt) for the w202 AMG C43 (and other w202s as well) I find the below:

Notice the reference that this part supersedes a 124-chassis part ---- 124-350-65-08.
But what is 124-350-65-08? I look it up in the EPC and I see that this part is used only on w201 cars. Huh? The w201 was released BEFORE the w124. Maybe my EPC is too new, and the 124-350-65-08 is an old part number that my new-ish EPC no longer shows to which 124 chassis this part is applicable to.

Oooo. The 202-350-34-08 kit looks like it MIGHT be what we want. Worth checking into, I'll probably buy one later this year to check it out. I'm curious if the bushings in the kit may be identical to the NLA ones we want for the 036 - should be p/n's stamped into the rubber bushing itself.

BTW, the p/n prefix can be weird. Sometimes MB has a prefix from a totally different chassis, and that p/n is not even used on the chassis it appears to be designed for (or at least, doesn't show in the EPC for that chassis). Don't lose sleep over it. Also remember that kit p/n's may include components - possibly with other chassis prefix in the component p/n - that don't appear anywhere in the EPC separately.

Confused yet?

 

[gerryvz]

Guhhhh. Gerry, the XPISS system doesn't have any newer/better info on 30 year old chassis. They very, very rarely update the old stuff anymore.

Ye Olde EPC has the advantage of running standalone without an internet connection, and is very fast when run on native Windoze (7 or 10). If there was any major advantage of XPISS, I'd go there, but to date I haven't heard it offers anything I can't live without.

At the rate that 124arts are going NLA and are getting superseded, it’s always helpful to have the latest and greatest info. I think it gets updated more than you think.

 

[gsxr]

At the rate that 124arts are going NLA and are getting superseded, it’s always helpful to have the latest and greatest info. I think it gets updated more than you think.

It rarely gets the supercessions. MB relies on Paragon for that.

You'll find a lot of supercessions appear in the RevolutionParts websites, which has been extremely helpful. Prior to RevParts it was difficult to get *any* supercession info without calling a dealership. If XPISS was truly kept updated for old chassis, you'd almost zero supercessions on RevParts, i.e. the part entered from the XPISS would be current. While it's possible XPISS has some sort of connection to Paragon, I really doubt it... I expect it's pulling from the same crusty old data source that the legacy EPC did.

 

[gerryvz]

From what I see, Pee-Pee/XPISS does show a fair number of supercessions, and is generally current. Again I'd take it over the RevolutionParts sites, just because it's a factory-sponsored data source rather than a third-party. I believe that Pee-Pee is part of MB's effort to get more of its systems consolidated onto a single platform and more in synch. That was a key purpose for migrating from EPC to Pee-Pee.

Klink could probably confirm or deny the level of data- and platform-sharing between the systems as it currently stands. I do know that when you log into Pee-Pee, there is a lot of stuff that ISN'T exposed to ordinary civilian/pedestrian users like myself, that DOES appear in stealership logins.

 

[gsxr]

Ah, but if you enter a part into RevParts and it shows a supercession, there's a 99%+ probability the new/superceded part is correct... and EPC/XPISS was showing old data.

AFAIK, the XPISS migration was more to move to newer technology platforms (i.e., off Java-based apps) for security etc... and some sharing with their other software. But I haven't heard a peep about it being integrated with the inventory management software (Paragon) which has always been completely different.

Klink? Buddy? You still alive?

 

[JCM1]

You're not cool with using Lemforder?

Just wanted to know if the part is OK

 

[gerryvz]

Yes. It is ok to use.

 

[Jlaa]

Oooo. The 202-350-34-08 kit looks like it MIGHT be what we want. Worth checking into, I'll probably buy one later this year to check it out. I'm curious if the bushings in the kit may be identical to the NLA ones we want for the 036 - should be p/n's stamped into the rubber bushing itself.

@gsxr, do you have any measurements for 202 351 09 42? These are the 1999-2002 R129 bushings (which are now NLA) (your picture attached below) that superseded the old w124 sportline bushings.













202-350-34-08 (our potential bushing which I will also note is used by the w/c208 AMG CLK55 and w202 AMG C43 both) also supersedes 201-351-28-42 (see below) ...



and the dimensions of that are as below (please disregard the face that the page says febi bilstein)

• 70mm thick
• Inner diameter - 17.0mm ; 33.0mm
• Outer diameter - 81.0mm ; 78.0mm
• Weight - 0.33Kg

 

[gsxr]

@gsxr, do you have any measurements for 202 351 09 42? These are the 1999-2002 R129 bushings (which are now NLA) (your picture attached below) that superseded the old w124 sportline bushings.

I don't have any measurements - sorry! We'd need a hoarder to pull one out of the box and check. Actually, any 124 rear bushing would work to check the OD.

However - if any 124 mount interchanges with any 201/202/208 mount, they should fit. From a quick look, I can't find any evidence of this... but it's still worth further investigation.

 

[northNH]

I’m a hoarder, but mine came in bags...
I believe all these dimensions line up: 70mm, 17 & 33mm, and the 78mm;
I can’t find a dimension = 81mm...

 

[gsxr]

Update... tried to order kit 202-350-34-08 and it's NLA. Which makes me think it had included the correct bushings we wanted.

 

[Jlaa]

Update... tried to order kit 202-350-34-08 and it's NLA. Which makes me think it had included the correct bushings we wanted.

Is Corteco an acceptable substitute?

 

[gerryvz]

Yes. As long as they are made in an EU country.

Do tell.

 

[Jlaa]

Damnit, all the 2023503408s made by Corteco I can find are made in China. Are China made Cortecos proven to be poor?

 

[nocfn]

If what you have in your car has failed - these are the best in the world! (or hit a junk yard and maybe the used are better than molded crayons or your failed mounts.

 

[gerryvz]

I would rather use Lemforder German-made pedestrian rear subframe mounts than Chinese made Corteco mounts.

But that's just me.

 

[gsxr]

Damnit, all the 2023503408s made by Corteco I can find are made in China. Are China made Cortecos proven to be poor?

Corteco is a reboxer for some items, like these mounts. Probably the same stuff in the box as Meyle. And the Febi, Vaico, & SWAG variants as well.

 

[Jlaa]

I would rather use Lemforder German-made pedestrian rear subframe mounts than Chinese made Corteco mounts.

But that's just me.

Yeah, my thoughts are along the same lines, even if the Chinese made Corteco mounts are supposed to be "sport line" mounts .... which has not been determined yet. I am thinking maybe to order one just as an experiment to measure and see what I get.... for science. I can take dimensional measurements but I do not have access to and do not know how to use a durometer to measure the hardness of the rubber.

Anyone here on this board know how to measure rubber hardness if I get this mount?

 

[gsxr]

Jlaa, you should order one of each brand, then send to Gerry for the SniffTest®.

 

[gerryvz]

No need for ME to do a Sniff Test. Just walk into a Harbor Fright store, calibrate and refresh your olfactory bulbs, and then sniff the Chinese-made mounts. You're looking for a sharp, pungent smell that grabs the hairs on the inside of your nostrils and yanks them HARD.

Then you know.

Remember my adage: "If it smells like the 'Fright, then it cannot be right!"

 

[NCCoder]

Has anyone tried the "pedestrian" mounts with the voids partially or fully filled with McMaster urethane?

 

[TimL]

129-351-14-42 supercedes to 202-351-09-42 and both are NLA.

124-351-02-42 is the "standard" bushing (not 500E/Sportline) and should be available from MB, although Lemforder ahould be ok as well.

I just ordered a set of 129-351-14-42 and a set of 202-350-34-08. With the former it explicitly states that it is the sportline version and that only one is available and with the latter There is no mention of being particular to a sportline suspension. We’ll see what North Korea’s finest rubber manufacturers end up sending me. I will post pictures ones I get these and then let you know what SGMotorsport thinks about these once he does the suspension overhaul in Jan.

Thanks to all for the research you posted on these parts

 

[gsxr]

Tim, where did you buy the 202-350-34-08 bushing kit? I tried ordering them a few months ago and the dealer said they were NLA. All I can find are aftermarket (Corteco, Meyle, MTC, Hamburglar, and some other brands I've never heard of).

 

[TimL]

Tim, where did you buy the 202-350-34-08 bushing kit? I tried ordering them a few months ago and the dealer said they were NLA. All I can find are aftermarket (Corteco, Meyle, MTC, Hamburglar, and some other brands I've never heard of).

Yeah Dave, I’m afraid the unit I bought is from Meyle, so I don’t have very high hopes for it. Interested to see how this one will compare to the other unit I ordered.

 

[Kyiv]

So, the tools recommended to replace subframe bushings on this forum are Miller 9110 and 9111. Apparently they are a poor fit, but better than nothing or subpar home creations



Browsing the internet, I saw a very nice thread with pictures on W210 subframe bushing replacements. The author is using tools that fit perfectly. Is there such a tool for W124? Does anyone know how much difference is there between R&Ring subframe bushings on W124 vs W210?

 

[gsxr]

There used to be tools from several different aftermarket mfr's, specific to the 124/201/129 chassis. Sadly, these appear to all be NLA now; although the Klann/Gedore kit may be available, but might cost more than OE? The OE tools are available but are not cheap. However, with appropriate threaded rods, you can fabricate stuff that will work. Even wood blocks can work for pressing in new bushings (they slide in easily with appropriate lubricant).

Pics of the SG (NLA), Baum (NLA, I think), and Klann are at the link below. I don't think I ever got photos of the OE tools as nobody ever bought them:

Index of /images/tools/subframe

Note the Miller 9110 is designed for the late-style Sportline bushing (202-351-09-42), which is NLA.

 

[gsxr]

Note the 210 photos show the tool ripping the center out of the forward/small bushing. They would have to then chisel the metal shell out of the subframe. Same problem on the 124 if you can't get the shell to pry loose using the top flange...

Also, 124 and 210 bushing R&R is nearly identical. Except the bushings are just slightly different enough that the tools may not work on the other chassis, at least for any plates which are not adjustable.

 

[linjam]

After all the research noted above, I am a bit confused. If I replace my rear subframe bushings, am I stuck with the pedestrian 124 versions, or is there a stiffer version that will work?

Thanks.

Jamie

 

[gsxr]

After all the research noted above, I am a bit confused. If I replace my rear subframe bushings, am I stuck with the pedestrian 124 versions, or is there a stiffer version that will work?

You are stuck with pedestrian, unless you can find NOS bushings, or MB resurrects them out of NLA.

That said, the new pedestrian bushings would probably be an improvement vs old/sagging original bushings.

 

[linjam]

You are stuck with pedestrian, unless you can find NOS bushings, or MB resurrects them out of NLA.

That said, the new pedestrian bushings would probably be an improvement vs old/sagging original bushings.

Mine don’t appear to be sagging or crushed, but I wonder if that tells the whole story.

 

[gsxr]

Visual inspection is sort of pass/fail. Bad ones are really obvious, but just because there is a partial air gap, doesn't mean they are in good condition. Photos below show old/original style mounts. I don't have any photos of the new-style mounts which have failed.

 

[linjam]

Visual inspection is sort of pass/fail. Bad ones are really obvious, but just because there is a partial air gap, doesn't mean they are in good condition. Photos below show old/original style mounts. I don't have any photos of the new-style mounts which have failed.

If an air gap does not mean they are in good shape, is there any other test? Is the passage of a certain amount of time a sufficient test, as it often is with other rubber parts?

 

[gsxr]

If an air gap does not mean they are in good shape, is there any other test? Is the passage of a certain amount of time a sufficient test, as it often is with other rubber parts?

There's no formal test I know of. If there's an air gap, with the car in the air and subframe/wheels not supported, the bushings are probably serviceable. If no air gap, they are worn.

 

[Jlaa]

I decided to write all the part numbers out on the EPC diagram to make sense of everything. Hope this helps someone.



NEW EDIT BELOW 2021-9-1 ---- I found some new information from @gxsr about the forward bushings. See below. @RicardoD please take note:

 

[Jlaa]

Tim, where did you buy the 202-350-34-08 bushing kit? I tried ordering them a few months ago and the dealer said they were NLA. All I can find are aftermarket (Corteco, Meyle, MTC, Hamburglar, and some other brands I've never heard of).

Yeah Dave, I’m afraid the unit I bought is from Meyle, so I don’t have very high hopes for it. Interested to see how this one will compare to the other unit I ordered.

@TimL, did you finally receive the Miley-Cyrus 202-350-34-08s? Were you able to compare the dimensions with the MB 129-351-14-42 to see if that might interchange? Of course since 129-351-14-42 and successor part 202-350-34-08 are both NLA, the only recourse is to get the pedestrian-non-V8 124.351.02.42 part ---- hence my query about the 202-350-34-08s, which fit v8-powered C43/CLK55s.

 

[lightdude95]

Hi guys,

The need of changing a steel fuel feed line eventually led me to dropping my subframe and changing every bit of rubber on it.
My car is a 1992 400E.

Two questions popped in my head after reading around on the interwebs:

1) Is there any "real" difference between these front subframe bushing part numbers? The parts both look nearly identical:

124-350-03-41 (<-- I already have this kit laying around)
124-350-04-41 (<-- I can order this through MB, this is the "correct" number for my car. Is this a stronger version for V8 models?)

2) The catalogue shows 124-351-02-42 as rear subframe bushings for my car (which are the normal ones), but also shows 129-351-14-42 (which is the sportline bushing and is NLA).

Did anyone figure out wether 202-350-34-08 (I have this kit laying around from a year or two ago, unopened) can substitute 129-351-14-42? If so, regarding the fact that my car isn't a 500E nor does it have sportline suspension, would it be a good idea to replace the rear mounts with the sportline variant? Or would it be better to use the standard bushings?

Kind regards,
Sam