Eibach drop .... KWiK pls help
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Eibach drop .... KWiK pls help
I just got my CLK320 fitted with Eibach springs. It’s a 209 so it shares the similar spring components with the 203. I wanted to rear to drop slightly less, so I also went from #3 spring pads to #4.
The result is that the front dropped 1.3 inches and the rear got 0.3 inches HIGHER than before.
I called Eibach who gave following two reasons.
1, The spring is attached half way between the bolt where the suspension arm rotates and the wheel, and if fitted with a thicker spring pad it will double the effect at the wheel. In my case, the #4 is 0.2 inches (5mm) thicker than the #3, so at the effect at the wheel is 0.4 inches (10mm).
2, The rear suspension arm there is supposedly bolted with a rubber/metal bushing that if tighten when the wheels are not resting to the ground, the bushing gets loaded up and changes the ride height (sorry for being non precise).
The first point makes sense to me (geometry) and I wanted to share it with this forum.
But if you then subtract the 0.4 inches from the pad change, the rear dropped 0.1 inch !!!
I have no clue how much the second point can make, but I have a hard time to believe what Eibach told me could have such major effect. Seems like BS to me. I think they got the 209 springs screwed up.
KWiK,
You have installed suspension on 203s. Does what Eibach told me make sense and can it have such a big effect. The shop I used does mostly suspension and engine tuning on Japanese (Honda) cars, and has limited experience of MB, but I think they are quite competent in general.
Thanks for any insight.
Cheers
The result is that the front dropped 1.3 inches and the rear got 0.3 inches HIGHER than before.
I called Eibach who gave following two reasons.
1, The spring is attached half way between the bolt where the suspension arm rotates and the wheel, and if fitted with a thicker spring pad it will double the effect at the wheel. In my case, the #4 is 0.2 inches (5mm) thicker than the #3, so at the effect at the wheel is 0.4 inches (10mm).
2, The rear suspension arm there is supposedly bolted with a rubber/metal bushing that if tighten when the wheels are not resting to the ground, the bushing gets loaded up and changes the ride height (sorry for being non precise).
The first point makes sense to me (geometry) and I wanted to share it with this forum.
But if you then subtract the 0.4 inches from the pad change, the rear dropped 0.1 inch !!!
I have no clue how much the second point can make, but I have a hard time to believe what Eibach told me could have such major effect. Seems like BS to me. I think they got the 209 springs screwed up.
KWiK,
You have installed suspension on 203s. Does what Eibach told me make sense and can it have such a big effect. The shop I used does mostly suspension and engine tuning on Japanese (Honda) cars, and has limited experience of MB, but I think they are quite competent in general.
Thanks for any insight.
Cheers
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,891
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
2002 C230 : 2007 C230
The Eibach springs for your car are supposed to provide a 30mm drop, so even with the thicker spring pad you should see about an inch drop. Even if Eibach told you correctly about tightening the control are bolt under load (I don't believe this is required) I doubt it would be the cause for over 1 inch in ride height.
I can think of 2 possible problems:
- Eibach gave you the wrong rear springs
- The installer doesn't have the springs seated properly in the upper & lower perches
The first is my guess.
I can think of 2 possible problems:
- Eibach gave you the wrong rear springs
- The installer doesn't have the springs seated properly in the upper & lower perches
The first is my guess.
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Thanks KWiK for your reply.
The partnumber is printed on the springs, and they do mach the TUV paperwork that came with them. I guess they could still be misprinted.
About the springs not being seated properly makes sense to me. Both left and right are equally high though, and if the springs were not seated properly it probably would be a fair chance it would turn out uneven.
I probably go ahead and change to #1 spring pads and live with it, and make sure they seat the springs properly.
BTW, Eibach customer service (and products) seems to have room for improvement.
Thanks and cheers
The partnumber is printed on the springs, and they do mach the TUV paperwork that came with them. I guess they could still be misprinted.
About the springs not being seated properly makes sense to me. Both left and right are equally high though, and if the springs were not seated properly it probably would be a fair chance it would turn out uneven.
I probably go ahead and change to #1 spring pads and live with it, and make sure they seat the springs properly.
BTW, Eibach customer service (and products) seems to have room for improvement.
Thanks and cheers
