Research of C7 vs. Stock shifter
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Kentucky
2002 C230K
Research of C7 vs. Stock shifter
Here's a picture comparing the shift linkage from the C7 package and stock. The C7 linkage is the one in the foreground. The part numbers (as you can see in the pictures) are "A203 260 43 09" for C7 and "A203 260 34 09" for stock. For orientation purposes, the part of the linkage that's on the left side of the picture is what faces the front of the car.
You can see that the stock linkage has a slight bend in the shifter, whereas the C7 does not. The shifter arm is also about a 1/2" shorter on the C7 linkage in comparison to stock. The indent where the shift knob locks is the same height from the top of the shifter arm on both. The tube you see coming out from the bottom and going to the left is the reverse mechanism, with the lockout portion being incorporated into the shifter socket.
In actually feeling the difference in throw on both, you can tell that the C7 has a shorter throw. In my opinion it's not a huge difference. I think most of the difference will actually be felt when it's in the car and the shorter shifter arm of the C7 will really come into play.
In examining the actual ball and socket mechanism, I can't really see where a company like UUC could adjust or improve, but who am I to say. With this information I'm still continuing to work on the UUC project, as I've not given up hope.
You can see that the stock linkage has a slight bend in the shifter, whereas the C7 does not. The shifter arm is also about a 1/2" shorter on the C7 linkage in comparison to stock. The indent where the shift knob locks is the same height from the top of the shifter arm on both. The tube you see coming out from the bottom and going to the left is the reverse mechanism, with the lockout portion being incorporated into the shifter socket.
In actually feeling the difference in throw on both, you can tell that the C7 has a shorter throw. In my opinion it's not a huge difference. I think most of the difference will actually be felt when it's in the car and the shorter shifter arm of the C7 will really come into play.
In examining the actual ball and socket mechanism, I can't really see where a company like UUC could adjust or improve, but who am I to say. With this information I'm still continuing to work on the UUC project, as I've not given up hope.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 552
Likes: 0
From: Calgary, AB, Canada
2002 C230K, Silver, 6-speed, Evo, Roof, Leather, CD, Staggered C7 Wheels
Very cool info, Bos!
Thanks a lot.
Can you see what may be responsible for the more precise feel of the C7 shifter?
I definitely felt the "rubberness" in a MY02 6speed C240 (but maybe that's a different linkage again).
The more I drive my car, the better the C7 shifter gets. It got easier to shift with no vagueness.
Thanks a lot.
Can you see what may be responsible for the more precise feel of the C7 shifter?
I definitely felt the "rubberness" in a MY02 6speed C240 (but maybe that's a different linkage again).
The more I drive my car, the better the C7 shifter gets. It got easier to shift with no vagueness.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
C230 coupe 6sp
Bos, Is the only difference the length and bend in the shifter rod? If that is the case, you can easily make the shifter shorter by shortening the rod. It will increase the amount of force you need to use to actually shift, but it could make it a very short throw if that is what you want.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Kentucky
2002 C230K
Originally posted by VoyagerDude
Very cool info, Bos!
Thanks a lot.
Can you see what may be responsible for the more precise feel of the C7 shifter?
I definitely felt the "rubberness" in a MY02 6speed C240 (but maybe that's a different linkage again).
The more I drive my car, the better the C7 shifter gets. It got easier to shift with no vagueness.
Very cool info, Bos!
Thanks a lot.
Can you see what may be responsible for the more precise feel of the C7 shifter?
I definitely felt the "rubberness" in a MY02 6speed C240 (but maybe that's a different linkage again).
The more I drive my car, the better the C7 shifter gets. It got easier to shift with no vagueness.
From a precision perspective, both shifters really felt the same. The mechanism that actually makes the C7 a shorter throw is encased in it's own housing underneath the white rubber piece you see. In other words, it's really hard to say what's responsible.
On another note, there are actually adjustments on the linkage that would help to remove any minor "sloppiness" of the shifter. Basically, adjustments that bring it back to factory spec.
Last edited by Bos; Apr 10, 2002 at 11:02 PM.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Kentucky
2002 C230K
Originally posted by speedfrk
Bos, Is the only difference the length and bend in the shifter rod? If that is the case, you can easily make the shifter shorter by shortening the rod. It will increase the amount of force you need to use to actually shift, but it could make it a very short throw if that is what you want.
Bos, Is the only difference the length and bend in the shifter rod? If that is the case, you can easily make the shifter shorter by shortening the rod. It will increase the amount of force you need to use to actually shift, but it could make it a very short throw if that is what you want.
As for making the shifter arm shorter, that a good idea. One way to do it would be to make it shorter from top of the shift arm. The only problem I see here is the indentation at the top part of the arm where the conical shift knob nut locks to keep the knob in place. Without that, getting into reverse without having the knob smack you in the face would be a slight problem.
As for shortening from the other end... not sure it's possible without recreating the portion that connects to the ball & socket part of the shifter. Definitely something to think about though.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Kentucky
2002 C230K
Originally posted by speedfrk
We always used to shorten them from the middle. Just cut out a section, and weld the top piece back on. Worked great on the ones we did.
We always used to shorten them from the middle. Just cut out a section, and weld the top piece back on. Worked great on the ones we did.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
