• Hi Guest !

    Welcome to the 500Eboard forum.

    Since its founding in late 2008, 500Eboard has become the leading resource on the Internet for all things related to the Mercedes-Benz 500E and E500. In recent years, we have also expanded to include the 400E and E420 models, which are directly related to the 500E/E500.

    We invite you to browse and take advantage of the information and resources here on the site. If you find helpful information, please register for full membership, and you'll find even more resources available. Feel free to ask questions, and make liberal use of the "Search" function to find answers.

    We hope you will become an active contributor to the community!

    Sincerely,
    500Eboard Management

What is a good "coilover" kit?

anton28

1992 300ce AMG w/Brabus widebody
Member
After hours of research, I'm still unable to make sense of what a good "Coilover" kit for the w124 chassis is. I don't see Penske, Motons, Konis or JRI supporting these cars. The only brand I'm familiar with is KW, yet I've never run KW like I have the other mentioned brands. Furthermore, I've learned that a true coilover setup is not recommended for the w124 chassis due to its design, where the strut towers are not designed to hold the car's weight unless reinforced. Due to this, we are left with a performance shock and a spring with adjustable perch kits, which for some odd reason are still called "coilovers"

What are my options if there are no budgetary restrictions? I always prioritize a comfortable, great-handling ride and am willing to go the extra mile with this build.

Is anyone here running true coilovers on the front and rear?

How easy are the adjustments for you who have the adjustable spring perches? In every photo I've seen, they seem to be difficult to access.
 
I can tell you that pretty much everything KW offers is geared for track use. I would never use these on a daily.

During my research on coilovers, I explored experiences from owners of Audi, BMW and other VW models aside from my own. I ended up going with Vogtland's, as they are built for cruising and comfort. They can of course be used on the track, but comfort was the priority. The Vogtlands do not have adjustable dampening and to maintain a quality OE type of ride, I replaced all my shock/strut mounts with new OEM rubber ones. While stiffer than the OE Sport suspension, the ride is very nice, especially given how low my car is. Very happy with these coilovers. Of course, my experiences are with my EOS not a Mercedes, but it should be similar assuming you can find a kit made/tuned for a heavy car like the W124.

I did see some videos about W201 owners reinforcing their vehicles for air ride, so the known weak points have fixes, which I assume would be applicable to the W124. Search YouTube.

Can't comment on the ease of adjustability, but anyone experienced with installing coilovers, kind of knows where to start from. My instructions to my shop was, drop it onto the tires and give me an even drop as I don't want a rake. I have heard that salt/corrosion can be a problem, so using some anti sieze grease on the threads would be recommended.
 

Attachments

  • IMG-1054.jpg
    IMG-1054.jpg
    3 MB · Views: 11
  • IMG_0017.jpg
    IMG_0017.jpg
    3.4 MB · Views: 11
What are my options if there are no budgetary restrictions? I always prioritize a comfortable, great-handling ride and am willing to go the extra mile with this build.
Let's back up a little. What are the specific reasons you want a coil-over setup, and are you planning to install on an E500E with SLS?



Is anyone here running true coilovers on the front and rear?
I don't know of anyone (yet) with coilovers on the 036 chassis, at least I don't recall seeing that on the forum in the past 10-15 years.



That said... Stern Garage offers an 036-specific Intrax coilover setup. Note it has a solid upper strut mount.



defahrwerk-Black-Titan-ARC-System-Stern-Garage-219.jpg
 
Be careful of any coil over kits which put all the load onto the upper shock mount. That was not designed to take all of the car's weight and have been known to crack the bodywork on poorly conceived kits.

Personally the W124 chassis does not lend itself to coilovers IMO. There are plenty of good spring and adjustable shock kits available which would be the way to go along with sway bar upgrades.
 
@gsxr This is going on my 1992 300CE without SLS. I'm looking to improve the overall handling and ride quality. In the past, I've done that with aftermarket coilovers, but I find myself in this new territory where a coilover set-up is not an option, and by the sounds of it, it does not need to be in order to achieve what I'm after.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Intrax kit you shared is not a true coilover kit but a dampener and adjustable spring combo with the spring living in its OEM place but sitting on a spring perch, which is adjustable.

I'm not looking to build a racecar, but I would like a comfortable ride, handling characteristics and ride height adjustability.
 
@gsxr This is going on my 1992 300CE without SLS. I'm looking to improve the overall handling and ride quality. In the past, I've done that with aftermarket coilovers, but I find myself in this new territory where a coilover set-up is not an option, and by the sounds of it, it does not need to be in order to achieve what I'm after.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Intrax kit you shared is not a true coilover kit but a dampener and adjustable spring combo with the spring living in its OEM place but sitting on a spring perch, which is adjustable.

I'm not looking to build a racecar, but I would like a comfortable ride, handling characteristics and ride height adjustability.
Many kits are like this, my EOS is no exception
 

Attachments

  • IMG-0250.jpg
    IMG-0250.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 8
@gsxr This is going on my 1992 300CE without SLS. I'm looking to improve the overall handling and ride quality. In the past, I've done that with aftermarket coilovers, but I find myself in this new territory where a coilover set-up is not an option, and by the sounds of it, it does not need to be in order to achieve what I'm after.
Ah, ok... 300CE is a different animal than a 500E. I'd strongly consider the factory Sportline suspension. The springs are still available new from Mercedes (ballpark $500/set). Most aftermarket springs are not recommended as they are a "one size fits most" with predictably mediocre results. The factory Sportline front sway bar (or, 1 size larger) is still available new, but the larger rear sway bars are NLA. If your stock rear swaybar is the oddball 13.5mm unit, a standard 15.0mm swaybar from a sedan/wagon will be a modest improvement. The 16.5mm rear swaybars are difficult to locate used. You could check with Blue Ridge MB, they might have some large rear bars available, but don't go too big unless you enjoy understeer.

For dampers the Bilstein Sports or possibly KONI Sports should work ok. There are some exotic dampers out there if you like fiddling with compression/rebound settings. If the suspension is all original from 1992, consider refreshing the rubber components... subframe mounts, link, etc etc... this will increase the cost substantially though.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Intrax kit you shared is not a true coilover kit but a dampener and adjustable spring combo with the spring living in its OEM place but sitting on a spring perch, which is adjustable.
Correct. A "true" coilover is generally a Bad Idea on the 124 chassis since the strut/shock mounts were not designed to support the entire weight of the car. The kit above (which is 500E-specific, with hydraulic SLS rear hydrolegs) has adjustable springs located in the stock spring location.



I'm not looking to build a racecar, but I would like a comfortable ride, handling characteristics and ride height adjustability.
The factory Sportline setup is pretty likely to achieve your goals.

:3gears:
 
Ah, ok... 300CE is a different animal than a 500E. I'd strongly consider the factory Sportline suspension. The springs are still available new from Mercedes (ballpark $500/set). Most aftermarket springs are not recommended as they are a "one size fits most" with predictably mediocre results. The factory Sportline front sway bar (or, 1 size larger) is still available new, but the larger rear sway bars are NLA. If your stock rear swaybar is the oddball 13.5mm unit, a standard 15.0mm swaybar from a sedan/wagon will be a modest improvement. The 16.5mm rear swaybars are difficult to locate used. You could check with Blue Ridge MB, they might have some large rear bars available, but don't go too big unless you enjoy understeer.

For dampers the Bilstein Sports or possibly KONI Sports should work ok. There are some exotic dampers out there if you like fiddling with compression/rebound settings. If the suspension is all original from 1992, consider refreshing the rubber components... subframe mounts, link, etc etc... this will increase the cost substantially though.



Correct. A "true" coilover is generally a Bad Idea on the 124 chassis since the strut/shock mounts were not designed to support the entire weight of the car. The kit above (which is 500E-specific, with hydraulic SLS rear hydrolegs) has adjustable springs located in the stock spring location.




The factory Sportline setup is pretty likely to achieve your goals.

:3gears:
I should have been clearer. :) It is a 1992 300CE-24 AMG, so does that mean I have the Sportline package? Unfortunately, the car doesn't have the OEM AMG springs or shocks anymore. They have since been replaced with Eibach lowering springs and Bilstein shocks, so I wonder if I have any of the Sportline upgrades that you mentioned. I'll check the size of my front and rear sway bars.

Can you point me in the direction of a good rubber rear subframe kit? I ordered all adjustable links for camber, caster, toe, and thrust, so it would be good to replace all the rubber as you suggested at the same time.
 
I should have been clearer. :) It is a 1992 300CE-24 AMG, so does that mean I have the Sportline package?
It depends. We'd need the VIN to check the datacard and see what option codes it was delivered with.


Unfortunately, the car doesn't have the OEM AMG springs or shocks anymore. They have since been replaced with Eibach lowering springs and Bilstein shocks, so I wonder if I have any of the Sportline upgrades that you mentioned.
It's possible it may have had the Sports undercarriage, with larger sway bars and possibly quicker ratio steering box. That's a real shame the original AMG components were removed.



I'll check the size of my front and rear sway bars.
Good idea - use a slide caliper if possible on a clean area of the bar. Measure in a few places and average the results.
Fronts are normally 26.5mm (stock) or 27.5mm (Sportline)
Rear may be 13.5mm (stock coupé), 15.0mm (stock sedan), or 16.5mm (Sportline)



Can you point me in the direction of a good rubber rear subframe kit?
If you mean the four round subframe-to-chassis bushings, this has become more complicated recently as the original components are NLA in OE/OEM parts. There are aftermarket bushings which might be acceptable. Additional reading here and here. I am not certain if the forward 'tall tab' bushings are still available from Febi as reboxed OEM Boge, or if Febi is now reboxing a no-name aftermarket bushing instead.


I ordered all adjustable links for camber, caster, toe, and thrust, so it would be good to replace all the rubber as you suggested at the same time.
Hmmm. Can you post a link to the adjustable arms? These tend to be are track-oriented items that may not be pleasant for street use. I have purchased cars in the past with all adjustable links with Heim-joint ends, and the car was soooo much nicer after I removed them and installed stock OE links instead. If you are running very wide rear wheels/tires and the car is lowered dramatically, you might need camber correction to reduce tire wear, but at normal Sportline ride height and wheels not more than 8.0-8.5" wide the camber correction generally isn't needed.

:e500launch:
 
It depends. We'd need the VIN to check the datacard and see what option codes it was delivered with.



It's possible it may have had the Sports undercarriage, with larger sway bars and possibly quicker ratio steering box. That's a real shame the original AMG components were removed.




Good idea - use a slide caliper if possible on a clean area of the bar. Measure in a few places and average the results.
Fronts are normally 26.5mm (stock) or 27.5mm (Sportline)
Rear may be 13.5mm (stock coupé), 15.0mm (stock sedan), or 16.5mm (Sportline)




If you mean the four round subframe-to-chassis bushings, this has become more complicated recently as the original components are NLA in OE/OEM parts. There are aftermarket bushings which might be acceptable. Additional reading here and here. I am not certain if the forward 'tall tab' bushings are still available from Febi as reboxed OEM Boge, or if Febi is now reboxing a no-name aftermarket bushing instead.



Hmmm. Can you post a link to the adjustable arms? These tend to be are track-oriented items that may not be pleasant for street use. I have purchased cars in the past with all adjustable links with Heim-joint ends, and the car was soooo much nicer after I removed them and installed stock OE links instead. If you are running very wide rear wheels/tires and the car is lowered dramatically, you might need camber correction to reduce tire wear, but at normal Sportline ride height and wheels not more than 8.0-8.5" wide the camber correction generally isn't needed.

:e500launch:
Here is my VIN, let me know what you find. :) WDB1240511B834275

I'll measure the swaybars this evening and report back.

This is the link kit: Mercedes Rear Camber/Caster/Toe/Thrust Arm C-Class W202 C180 C220 C280 C36 C43 | eBay

My car is lowered 1.5 inches. I'm having issues with the rear caster, thrust, and camber angles. For example, I'm running negative 2.8 camber on the driver's side and negative 3.6 camber on the passenger side. I need to adjust the rear to negative 2.0 on both sides. Also, either the caster or the thrust angle is affecting how the driver's rear wheel is sitting in the wheel well, it's about 3/16-1/4 to to forward and needs to be centered in the wheel well. I am running 18X10 rears, the car is a widebody, and I have room to go wider, which I will, hence why I'm trying to dial In my suspension. I need all 4 corners dialed in and adjustable down to the mm. Since I will be maximizing my wheel and tire fitment, I need all the adjustability I can get.

Current wheel size set up: 18x8.5 Fronts w/235/40/18 and 18X10 rears w/275/35/18.
 
I got the sway bar measurements.

Fronts measure 28mm and rears are 17mm. Sometimes I would get a 27.9 and 16.9 but mostly it was solid 28 and 17.

I should mention that I have a Sportine style steering wheel and what looks to be r129 brake calipers.
 
Here is my VIN, let me know what you find. :) WDB1240511B834275
Oooo, that VIN has code 653 Sports Undercarriage, along with code 957! Datacard here. This car should have come from the factory with Sportline swaybars, steering gearbox, stiffer front LCA bushings, and stiffer rear/large subframe bushings. I think code 957 would have included AMG springs+dampers but I'm not positive. The AMG parts are NLA. I'd go with the factory Sportline springs. The dampers are recent Bilstien Sports, correct? If so, I'd leave them alone.


Interesting - I had not seen that particular kit before. A few comments:

1) Poly bushings like to squeak. Yeah, you can lubricate them, but you may need to do this on a regular basis... or add zerk fittings to make it easier. On the racetrack you don't care, around town, you might.​
2) All this adjustability seems cool, but can create an absolute nightmare for the alignment tech - some alignment shops might not want to touch the car. In reality, 99.9999% of the time you'd only want to adjust rear camber slightly less negative to reduce wear on the inner edge of the rear tires, if wider than stock. All the other adjustable links are, IMO, sort of a waste. They should all be set so the length is identical to stock as a starting point, btw.​
3) The factory links have bonded rubber bushings which cause the suspension to want to "return to center". More details and video link here. Poly bushings won't do this.​
4) The seller incorrectly identifies one of the links as a "caster arm". This does not exist. Mercedes identifies the 5 rear links as pulling, pushing, camber, toe / tie rod, and spring link.​
5) That seller's feedback is not fantastic. Have you received the kit yet? :blink:



My car is lowered 1.5 inches.
Can you measure ride height from wheel center to fender lip, as shown here and here? That is more useful data to work with, for actual ride height. Remember there is such a thing as "too low", especially for street use. Once the car is sitting on the suspension stops, you could literally remove the springs and it wouldn't go any lower.



I'm having issues with the rear caster, thrust, and camber angles.
This is unusual. Does the car have all factory components on the 5-link rear suspension, i.e. not adjustable links? What shop told you the caster and thrust angles are out of spec? Those are normally fixed and should never need adjustment. (Camber adjustment is a different story.) The dealer alignment computer does not even show data for rear caster - only camber and toe.



For example, I'm running negative 2.8 camber on the driver's side and negative 3.6 camber on the passenger side. I need to adjust the rear to negative 2.0 on both sides.
Rear camber is directly proportional to ride height. Lower = more negative. But, left to right should be closer together, you have almost 1° difference left to right, which is fishy. -2.0° would be a good compromise for performance driving/handling. Closer to -1.0° would help the inner edge of the tires last longer since you have 10" rears.



Also, either the caster or the thrust angle is affecting how the driver's rear wheel is sitting in the wheel well, it's about 3/16-1/4 to to forward and needs to be centered in the wheel well.
The 124 chassis does not have the rear wheels centered in the fender opening / wheel well, they are normally pulled forward. However, left to right should be reasonably close to each other, assuming the custom rear fenders were welded on symmetrically.



I am running 18X10 rears, the car is a widebody, and I have room to go wider, which I will, hence why I'm trying to dial In my suspension. I need all 4 corners dialed in and adjustable down to the mm. Since I will be maximizing my wheel and tire fitment, I need all the adjustability I can get.
Current wheel size set up: 18x8.5 Fronts w/235/40/18 and 18X10 rears w/275/35/18.
Whoa, that is a phat setup! Any wider in the rear (or, pushed out any further) would be strictly for appearances. These cars tend to understeer, so for performance, you'd want wider wheels/tires up front to help balance the handling. That said - adjusting any of the 5 rear links to try and make bigger wheels/tires clear is a Very Bad Idea. The rear suspension should be dialed in per factory specs (other than camber, for tire life).




I got the sway bar measurements.

Fronts measure 28mm and rears are 17mm. Sometimes I would get a 27.9 and 16.9 but mostly it was solid 28 and 17.
Assuming these are factory Mercedes sway bars, they are very likely 27.5mm front and 16.5mm rear. The paint on the bar adds a bit to the measurement. The part number is stamped into factory bars, if you want to know for sure, you could try and locate these numbers - may need to wire brush the number to read it clearly. On the bright side, you don't need to upgrade these bars.



I should mention that I have a Sportine style steering wheel and what looks to be r129 brake calipers.
The Sportline style steering wheel was factory, per option code 281 in your datacard. This also had the different airbag shape as seen on your car. However, your car has an aftermarket steering wheel with wood and sculptured leather, which is not original from the factory. If you post photos of the brake calipers we can probably figure out exactly what they are, front & rear.



:blower:
 
Last edited:
Oooo, that VIN has code 653 Sports Undercarriage, along with code 957! Datacard here. This car should have come from the factory with Sportline swaybars, steering gearbox, stiffer front LCA bushings, and stiffer rear/large subframe bushings. I think code 957 would have included AMG springs+dampers but I'm not positive. The AMG parts are NLA. I'd go with the factory Sportline springs. The dampers are recent Bilstien Sports, correct? If so, I'd leave them alone.
Correct, Bilstein Sports.

Interesting - I had not seen that particular kit before. A few comments:

1) Poly bushings like to squeak. Yeah, you can lubricate them, but you may need to do this on a regular basis... or add zerk fittings to make it easier. On the racetrack you don't care, around town, you might.​
Correct. Im very familiar with this.

2) All this adjustability seems cool, but can create an absolute nightmare for the alignment tech - some alignment shops might not want to touch the car. In reality, 99.9999% of the time you'd only want to adjust rear camber slightly less negative to reduce wear on the inner edge of the rear tires, if wider than stock. All the other adjustable links are, IMO, sort of a waste. They should all be set so the length is identical to stock as a starting point, btw.​
Been there, done that :) Im that guy that will put in the time. There is another reason for this upgrade. There will be a significant power increase with a 600hp 6.2L swap in the fall. Everything in the rear needs to be reinforced. There is too much flex in the factory parts.

3) The factory links have bonded rubber bushings which cause the suspension to want to "return to center". More details and video link here. Poly bushings won't do this.​
But with that said, with the new links, everything will be set in place, and the overall movement will be greatly minimized.

4) The seller incorrectly identifies one of the links as a "caster arm". This does not exist. Mercedes identifies the 5 rear links as pulling, pushing, camber, toe / tie rod, and spring link.​
There has to be a caster adjustment; isnt that pulling and pushing?

5) That seller's feedback is not fantastic. Have you received the kit yet? :blink:
I have his parts on my CL55 and cant say anything about him or his product. Everything is actually very well made.

Can you measure ride height from wheel center to fender lip, as shown here and here? That is more useful data to work with, for actual ride height. Remember there is such a thing as "too low", especially for street use. Once the car is sitting on the suspension stops, you could literally remove the springs and it wouldn't go any lower.
I will once the car is back on the ground. I ordered 8 different tire sets, which I've been testing on the wheels all week. Im mainly testing all 235/40/18 and 275/35/18's from different brands to see how much wider and taller each is compared to the next. As I'm sure you know, the actual size of the rubber can greatly differ not just from brand to brand but from different products under the same brand.

This is unusual. Does the car have all factory components on the 5-link rear suspension, i.e. not adjustable links? What shop told you the caster and thrust angles are out of spec? Those are normally fixed and should never need adjustment. (Camber adjustment is a different story.) The dealer alignment computer does not even show data for rear caster - only camber and toe.
It's not uncommon in my experience. Most people won't notice it at 'normal' ride heights and with standard wheel/tire combinations. However, when you start fine-tuning every millimeter in height, width, and circumference, the irregularities of these cars become more apparent. An eighth of an inch may not be noticeable with an inch of gap, but with a quarter-inch gap, that slight difference becomes much more noticeable.

Rear camber is directly proportional to ride height. Lower = more negative. But, left to right should be closer together, you have almost 1° difference left to right, which is fishy. -2.0° would be a good compromise for performance driving/handling. Closer to -1.0° would help the inner edge of the tires last longer since you have 10" rears.
I'm not worried about tire wear. I always run about 2 - 2.5 negative camber.

Whoa, that is a phat setup! Any wider in the rear (or, pushed out any further) would be strictly for appearances. These cars tend to understeer, so for performance, you'd want wider wheels/tires up front to help balance the handling. That said - adjusting any of the 5 rear links to try and make bigger wheels/tires clear is a Very Bad Idea. The rear suspension should be dialed in per factory specs (other than camber, for tire life).
Yeah, the set up is pretty cool. I'm not adjusting the rear links to fit bigger tires; the extra width, front, and rear will come from resizing my wheels and getting as little clearance as I can around all points of potential contact. Realistically ill. be able to fit 265 front and a 295 rear all although 275/305 is my goal. As mentioned earlier, the car will end up with 600hp, hence why I'm looking to improve the suspension and be able to run more rubber. Chassis modifications and brakes are my next topic of research.

Assuming these are factory Mercedes sway bars, they are very likely 27.5mm front and 16.5mm rear. The paint on the bar adds a bit to the measurement. The part number is stamped into factory bars, if you want to know for sure, you could try and locate these numbers - may need to wire brush the number to read it clearly. On the bright side, you don't need to upgrade these bars.
Ill definitely search for those numbers!

The Sportline style steering wheel was factory, per option code 281 in your datacard. This also had the different airbag shape as seen on your car. However, your car has an aftermarket steering wheel with wood and sculptured leather, which is not original from the factory. If you post photos of the brake calipers we can probably figure out exactly what they are, front & rear.
Yes, the car has a sportline style - Brabus steering wheel
 
Note that the C124 coupes have the slowest steering box as standard. And the C124 Sport line option code means it does have a quicker box but actually just the same speed as a Saloon. So it's not a "true" Sportline 124 quick box if that makes sense.
 
Note that the C124 coupes have the slowest steering box as standard. And the C124 Sport line option code means it does have a quicker box but actually just the same speed as a Saloon. So it's not a "true" Sportline 124 quick box if that makes sense.
so, who gets the "true" Sportline 124 quickbox?
 
so, who gets the "true" Sportline 124 quickbox?
Slowest steering box ratio: All coupé & cabrio (non-Sportline)

Medium steering box ratio: All sedans & wagons, coupé & cabrio with Sportline (Sports undercarriage)

Quickest steering box ratio: All sedans & wagons with Sportline (Sports undercarriage)


Your coupé should have the "medium" steering box. The quickest-ratio is difficult to locate AND also difficult to verify that it's really the quickest ratio, when shopping for used ones... most do not have the part number etched on the box, and the casting numbers are the same for all 3 boxes, so that's no help. The quick ratio box is nice, but this is kinda low priority relative to your other planned modifications (and, if you end up needing rack & pinion for the engine swap, there's no point).

:sawzall:
 
Been there, done that :) Im that guy that will put in the time.
Cool! Do you do your own alignment work, or have a pro shop nearby capable of this stuff? I think @Jlaa knows a Superbeetle/Porch shop in the Bay area that seems to know what they are doing. You are moving out of the realm of consumer-grade alignment, and into the area of full race shops that spend a lot of time at Sears Point ... Infineon ... Sonoma Raceway and Thunderhill.


There is another reason for this upgrade. There will be a significant power increase with a 600hp 6.2L swap in the fall.
OOOO! Do tell! 6.2L as in M156 or M159? That would be awesomesauce.


Everything in the rear needs to be reinforced. There is too much flex in the factory parts.
You're going to need to toss the factory 6-cyl subframe, and swap in the reinforced V8 subframe from the 400E/500E. There are a couple of reinforced factory links (including a nice solid-aluminum torque link) but you are going to the next level anyway.


But with that said, with the new links, everything will be set in place, and the overall movement will be greatly minimized.
You'll want to look into the "good" subframe bushings as mentioned previously. Or maybe custom urethane stuff. Options are iffy now that the OE bits are NLA.


There has to be a caster adjustment; isnt that pulling and pushing?
This is getting beyond my pay grade. Caster up front is measured with the wheels turned. It's not a normal adjustment on the Mercedes rear 5-link design. You gotta be really careful here, small changes can make a big difference at high speed.


I have his parts on my CL55 and cant say anything about him or his product. Everything is actually very well made.
OK - I'm not familiar with the seller, but 2 negatives for "never shipped" was concerning.


I will once the car is back on the ground. I ordered 8 different tire sets, which I've been testing on the wheels all week. Im mainly testing all 235/40/18 and 275/35/18's from different brands to see how much wider and taller each is compared to the next. As I'm sure you know, the actual size of the rubber can greatly differ not just from brand to brand but from different products under the same brand.
Yep - the size can vary, and also the shape of the sidewall, which is critical if clearances are tight to the fenders or trims. I'd consider a 245 front btw, with a 275 rear... should be plenty of clearance up there. I've run 255/285 on the 500E without issues (on 8.5 / 10.0 wheels).


It's not uncommon in my experience. Most people won't notice it at 'normal' ride heights and with standard wheel/tire combinations. However, when you start fine-tuning every millimeter in height, width, and circumference, the irregularities of these cars become more apparent. An eighth of an inch may not be noticeable with an inch of gap, but with a quarter-inch gap, that slight difference becomes much more noticeable.
True - what I meant was, don't try to fully center the rear wheel in the rear fender well. It was never meant to be that way from the factory.


Yeah, the set up is pretty cool. I'm not adjusting the rear links to fit bigger tires; the extra width, front, and rear will come from resizing my wheels and getting as little clearance as I can around all points of potential contact. Realistically ill. be able to fit 265 front and a 295 rear all although 275/305 is my goal. As mentioned earlier, the car will end up with 600hp, hence why I'm looking to improve the suspension and be able to run more rubber.
Wow. That is SUPER aggressive tire sizing. I think 265 front can be done with some massaging. Not sure about 275. Same story in the back, 295 with the right tire profile may work... 305, I dunno. Your wheel width and offsets will need to be millimeter-perfect to avoid rubbing when cornering at max lateral G's, and when trail braking.


Chassis modifications and brakes are my next topic of research.
What ty pe of chassis mods are you thinking of? I assume the typical "Silver Arrow" brake setup will be inadequate for your plans. I'd look into the AMG 360x32 front brakes (6-pot calipers, 2-pc rotors) used on the W211 E63, with the matching 330mm rears (4-pot calipers). Juan in SoCal has custom brackets to fit those front brakes and I think the rears are mostly a bolt-on with the correct brake disc. Those brakes were designed for a 4200-lb car with >500hp, and should work well on a 3600lb car with 600hp.


:3gears:
 
Cool! Do you do your own alignment work, or have a pro shop nearby capable of this stuff? I think @Jlaa knows a Superbeetle/Porch shop in the Bay area that seems to know what they are doing. You are moving out of the realm of consumer-grade alignment, and into the area of full race shops that spend a lot of time at Sears Point ... Infineon ... Sonoma Raceway and Thunderhill.
I don't do the work myself, but I'm right there with my guy talking through it. I'm lucky to have an extraordinary speed shop that is local to me and that I have been working with for about 5 years. They build cars from the ground up and have an extensive racing background - drag, track, and salt.

OOOO! Do tell! 6.2L as in M156 or M159? That would be awesomesauce.
I wish I could get my hands on an M159, but I'm sure it's at least 3X the cost of an M156. They only came in an SLS right? I started looking on CoPart for a wrecked W212 E63 with a 6.2 to use as a donor.

You're going to need to toss the factory 6-cyl subframe, and swap in the reinforced V8 subframe from the 400E/500E. There are a couple of reinforced factory links (including a nice solid-aluminum torque link) but you are going to the next level anyway.
Great suggestion! I needed to start researching the subframe options. I'll start looking for one ASAP.

What are my options with the rear end?

You'll want to look into the "good" subframe bushings as mentioned previously. Or maybe custom urethane stuff. Options are iffy now that the OE bits are NLA.
Yes I have your notes and will do.

Yep - the size can vary, and also the shape of the sidewall, which is critical if clearances are tight to the fenders or trims. I'd consider a 245 front btw, with a 275 rear... should be plenty of clearance up there. I've run 255/285 on the 500E without issues (on 8.5 / 10.0 wheels).
What sidewall profile were your 255 and 285 tires? Probably 255/35 and 285/30?

My 235/40 in the front is very bulky and tall, and so is the 275/35 in the rear. I actually test-fitted a 285/35 rear yesterday, and it was way too fat. There was too much sidewall, which bubbled out.

Wow. That is SUPER aggressive tire sizing. I think 265 front can be done with some massaging. Not sure about 275. Same story in the back, 295 with the right tire profile may work... 305, I dunno. Your wheel width and offsets will need to be millimeter-perfect to avoid rubbing when cornering at max lateral G's, and when trail braking.
I will do my best to push the limits :)

What ty pe of chassis mods are you thinking of? I assume the typical "Silver Arrow" brake setup will be inadequate for your plans. I'd look into the AMG 360x32 front brakes (6-pot calipers, 2-pc rotors) used on the W211 E63, with the matching 330mm rears (4-pot calipers). Juan in SoCal has custom brackets to fit those front brakes and I think the rears are mostly a bolt-on with the correct brake disc. Those brakes were designed for a 4200-lb car with >500hp, and should work well on a 3600lb car with 600hp.
Finding a set of newer AMG brakes was the goal. Are the W211 brakes the same as the W215 cars? It would be nice to see if I can use the W212 brakes if I end up getting a wrecked donor.

As far as chassis mods. Reinforce the front and rear shock towers, if I decide to go with a true-coilover system. For sure, subframe connectors, and some sort of rear-end bracing. My plan is to assess this next week. I'll keep you posted on my findings.
 
Last edited:
I wish I could get my hands on an M159, but I'm sure it's at least 3X the cost of an M156. They only came in an SLS right? I started looking on CoPart for a wrecked W212 E63 with a 6.2 to use as a donor.
Correct - the M159 is SLS and hard to find. Some of the bits can be used on the M156, for example the DLC coated lifters / cam followers. I think the intake is the main reason for the M159 power gain, but there are obvious issues with hood clearance. I am not sure if you can retain the steering gearbox with the M156. Blue Ridge MB is working on an M156 in 500E, your shop may want to consult with them.


What are my options with the rear end?
Your car would have come with the 210mm diff, I believe in 3.69 gear ratio. You'll need to figure out what transmission will be used, what the overdrive ratio is on the trans, and what rear axle ratio will work best. With 600hp on tap, you may not want a low numerical ratio, traction might be non-existent at low speeds. The W211 E63 with M156 and 722.9 seven-speed transmission had a 2.82 ratio.

The typical 124 chassis 2.65 / 2.82 / 3.06 ratios in the 210mm diff used with non-overdrive transmissions (i.e., 722.3 on the 400E/500E) may or may not work. There are Quaife and Wavetrac ATB's available for those 3 ratios, plus the nifty OS Giken diffs. If you want 3.27, 3.46, or keep the 3.69... getting a limited-slip diff carrier could be a full-custom affair. I'm not sure what ratios OS Giken supports, their website is lacking in technical specs. BTW, if you decide to not use the 3.69 diff in your car, drop me a line - that might be fun to play with at the dragstrip in a 500E. 😁



What sidewall profile were your 255 and 285 tires? Probably 255/35 and 285/30?
I had 255/40 and 285/35 which were factory fitments on the 8.5/9.5 wheel combo on some R230's and similar chassis. The sidewalls were kinda phat. See photo below of the 285/35 on a 10.0" wheel. These are a few percent larger diameter than stock on a 500E. Although it looks like it sticks out of the fender a bit, the wheel moves inward as suspension moves up, and there was zero rubbing front or rear.



My 235/40 in the front is very bulky and tall, and so is the 275/35 in the rear. I actually test-fitted a 285/35 rear yesterday, and it was way too fat. There was too much sidewall, which bubbled out.
You might be able to get around this with a wider wheel that pushes to the limits on the inside, rather than pushing to the outside. Also, you may need to roll the fender lips to the max possible.



Finding a set of newer AMG brakes was the goal. Are the W211 brakes the same as the W215 cars? It would be nice to see if I can use the W212 brakes if I end up getting a wrecked donor.
Good question - I am not sure if the W211 E63 brakes are the same as W215 or W212. There were a lot of variations, be REALLY careful when selecting. For example, there are Black Series C63 brakes that seem better because the rotors are 36mm instead of 32mm, except the rotors are much deeper and will hit the control arm... no-go on that fitment.



As far as chassis mods. Reinforce the front and rear shock towers, if I decide to go with a true-coilover system. For sure, subframe connectors, and some sort of rear-end bracing. My plan is to assess this next week. I'll keep you posted on my findings.
Ah, got it. Depending on your intended use, I'd stick with the stock suspension design. The ROI for full coilovers is, IMO, poor. You're mostly just getting infinite ride height adjustment (and, possibly more spring rate options, if you want to spend dozens of hours track tuning with different spring rate combinations / adjustments). I'd prefer to invest in custom dampers with adjustable compression & rebound, but that's just me.


1712242790857.jpeg
 
Correct - the M159 is SLS and hard to find. Some of the bits can be used on the M156, for example the DLC coated lifters / cam followers. I think the intake is the main reason for the M159 power gain, but there are obvious issues with hood clearance. I am not sure if you can retain the steering gearbox with the M156. Blue Ridge MB is working on an M156 in 500E, your shop may want to consult with them.
I'll take a look and see what Blue Ridge MB is up to. Thanks for sharing.

Your car would have come with the 210mm diff, I believe in 3.69 gear ratio. You'll need to figure out what transmission will be used, what the overdrive ratio is on the trans, and what rear axle ratio will work best. With 600hp on tap, you may not want a low numerical ratio, traction might be non-existent at low speeds. The W211 E63 with M156 and 722.9 seven-speed transmission had a 2.82 ratio.
Got it!

The typical 124 chassis 2.65 / 2.82 / 3.06 ratios in the 210mm diff used with non-overdrive transmissions (i.e., 722.3 on the 400E/500E) may or may not work. There are Quaife and Wavetrac ATB's available for those 3 ratios, plus the nifty OS Giken diffs. If you want 3.27, 3.46, or keep the 3.69... getting a limited-slip diff carrier could be a full-custom affair. I'm not sure what ratios OS Giken supports, their website is lacking in technical specs. BTW, if you decide to not use the 3.69 diff in your car, drop me a line - that might be fun to play with at the dragstrip in a 500E. 😁
Great great great info! Im saving all of this as notes on my end. Thank you! You will. absolutely be the first to know if my dif is up for grabs.
Good question - I am not sure if the W211 E63 brakes are the same as W215 or W212. There were a lot of variations, be REALLY careful when selecting. For example, there are Black Series C63 brakes that seem better because the rotors are 36mm instead of 32mm, except the rotors are much deeper and will hit the control arm... no-go on that fitment.
I have a w215 CL55. I'm going to see if I can fit the 18" Brabus wheel over the calipers. Noted on the 32mm rotor!

Ah, got it. Depending on your intended use, I'd stick with the stock suspension design. The ROI for full coilovers is, IMO, poor. You're mostly just getting infinite ride height adjustment (and, possibly more spring rate options, if you want to spend dozens of hours track tuning with different spring rate combinations / adjustments). I'd prefer to invest in custom dampers with adjustable compression & rebound, but that's just me.
I am exploring a custom build with JRI. I've done a few one-off projects with them, the most recent one for my Testarossa, which has 6 coilovers, 4 in the rear. I also opted for a hydraulic front lift system. If I go that route, I'll keep the forum updated.

Speaking of hydraulics, if there was a W215-style self-leveling hydraulic system for a w124, that would be splendid. There is a guy; I'm sure you have seen him as well, with a w124 wagon who retrofitted a hydraulic, self-leveling system on all four corners of his wagon.
 
Any updates with this car? lol
EDIT: I forgot to mention, the car I am referring to is the one from POST nos. #11 and #13 - VIN provided by @anton28 !!

@admin/@gsxr - Dave, please issue an extra post/thread for the motor/tranny auction ending today at 3pm-EST, if you consider this were needed.. (remember? Data card with both 653-957 codes)


Dankeschön-Gracias!

@ArauzMotoring - Now that I saw you're asking about this 'car', which is supposed to have been parted away (edit: my excuses - I didn't want to mix it up with another car, for which the thread was actually started) - my eyes spotted an ad for auction of its motor & gearbox assembly - see link below for MBM site..

JUST 4 HOURS to bid left!! Current bid $2,5k - I'm attaching some screenshots with data and infos about EZL on the comment area.

VIN of 'donor' WDB1240511B834275 (see post #11) on this same thread
Engine no. 104980-12-035697
Gearbox no. 722501-03-764057


M104 AMG 3.4-Liter 24v Engine & 722.5 5-Speed Automatic Transmission​

Rare Number-Matching AMG Engine & Transmission Combo​



Auction ends today at 12:40pm PST/ 3:40pm EST on The MB Market!

This M104 3.4-liter 24 valve gasoline inline-6 engine was originally built for a 1992 Mercedes-Benz 300CE 3.4 AMG which spent time in Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and most recently the United States.


The car was purchased by the previous owner from a known collector and the engine/transmission removed simultaneously in preparation for an engine swap. The auction includes the engine and transmission mated together along with the alternator, ancillary pumps, drive belts, and AMG M104 airbox. The engine and transmission are noted to be in good working order with video showing it turning over. Power steering fluid and engine oil have been drained. This M104 3.4-liter AMG engine is now offered on behalf of the seller out of Marietta, Georgia and includes a steel rig and particle box with lid for shipping and transportation, reducing packaging costs for the winning bidder. Bid now on MBM!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6215.png
    IMG_6215.png
    2.7 MB · Views: 3
  • IMG_6216.png
    IMG_6216.png
    2.9 MB · Views: 3
  • IMG_6217.png
    IMG_6217.png
    2.5 MB · Views: 3
  • IMG_6218.png
    IMG_6218.png
    233.7 KB · Views: 2
  • IMG_6219.png
    IMG_6219.png
    319.8 KB · Views: 2
  • IMG_6220.png
    IMG_6220.png
    382.5 KB · Views: 2
  • IMG_6221.png
    IMG_6221.png
    340.7 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_6222.png
    IMG_6222.png
    307.9 KB · Views: 2
  • IMG_6214.png
    IMG_6214.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 1
  • IMG_6213.png
    IMG_6213.png
    3.6 MB · Views: 2
  • IMG_6205.jpeg
    IMG_6205.jpeg
    76.2 KB · Views: 3
  • IMG_6206.jpeg
    IMG_6206.jpeg
    103.4 KB · Views: 2
  • IMG_6207.jpeg
    IMG_6207.jpeg
    150.7 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_6208.jpeg
    IMG_6208.jpeg
    52.5 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_6209.jpeg
    IMG_6209.jpeg
    144.2 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_6210.jpeg
    IMG_6210.jpeg
    167 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_6211.jpeg
    IMG_6211.jpeg
    72.5 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_6212.jpeg
    IMG_6212.jpeg
    67.2 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
Update on post #23

Auction ended and top bidder was @MrVolante500E ($ 8,700)

Reserve was dropped by seller at $ 6,600 - here's the bidders history (attached)

Alberto
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6373.jpeg
    IMG_6373.jpeg
    401.8 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
Back
Top