Prepping for my track days on 4/23. Flushed the brake fluid...
When under the car doing the brake fluid, I noticed a coating of oily slime covering the bottom of what I believe is the transmission pan (black, flat pan). I'm having it checked today, but it felt/looked like motor oil. I guess it oculd be transmission fluid. I'll hope for the best, but if it's a problem, it'lll be a warranty claim. Given the location, it could be coming from anywhere, and just splattering the bottom of the pan.
Last edited by Code3 Performance; Apr 16, 2007 at 09:38 PM.
Verdict? So far a B+. With the tallest spring shims in the back, the rear is still a bit low for my taste (maybe 1/2" too low) and the front is just about perfect. I am inclined to withhold final judgment until I've done my track day; and perhaps after the springs "settle" (hoping the rears don't). If I have any doubts or problems with handling, I'm going to punt them back to H&R and get the substitute springs.
Based on this morning's commute, I have to say that I am VERY happy
with the ride and the increased firmness. It is by no means harsh, but definitely less floaty. It will pass the wife test -- i.e. the wife won't know the difference. I will not know until I hit the track how the springs affect turn in and overall balance. My commute is fairly urban and traffic-laden, so I do not get a chance to really test the setup.
Visually, the rears seem to have some negative camber, as do the fronts. I'll call the shop today and see (they were closed when I picked up) what the alignment settings turned out to be.
Pics to come.
Last edited by Fifth Ring; Apr 17, 2007 at 09:34 AM.
Still running stock shocks. I was a little worried, but I really like the ride. Probably stupid not to change them at 44,000 miles; but I think I can get another year to 18 months out of them.



Moisture can enter the brake system of any Mercedes because the tank is vented to the air. A small amount of moisture is acceptable in a daily driver, but is not the reason brake fluid should be changed every two years. It is copper absorbtion that is a greater problem. Most workshops cannot measure the level, so a conservative time interval has been established.
Trending Topics
Your second paragraph does not draw a conclusion with a recommendation as to what interval you are proposing.
"but is not the reason brake fluid should be changed every two years. It is copper absorbtion that is a greater problem. Most workshops cannot measure the level, so a conservative time interval has been established"
Could you carry your logic further?
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
I'll report more later. Let's just say that there are some S4 and Evo owners mumbling about an old guy in a Benz.



Your second paragraph does not draw a conclusion with a recommendation as to what interval you are proposing.
"but is not the reason brake fluid should be changed every two years. It is copper absorbtion that is a greater problem. Most workshops cannot measure the level, so a conservative time interval has been established"
Could you carry your logic further?
http://www.acustrip.com/brake_fluid_testing.pdf
At Mercedes approval of service parts is not reviewed by the sales department. It is the bailiwick of engineering alone. Mercedes uses advanced systems that require different fluids, oil, anti-freeze, transmission, & brake fluid, than used by other car makers. The much smaller numbers of Mercedes cars leads to mass markerters not being interested stocking slow moving consumables.
I agree with spr that Castrol SRF is excellent in a 996. Either that or ATE blue on race day. I would not put it in a daily driver. It is too expensive and no benifit comes from it.
Last edited by Moviela; Apr 24, 2007 at 04:45 AM.
I am not trying to be difficult, buy challenge the topic and statements made herein, as you are, as to the merits of one fluid over the other. It is only with these type of debates that we gain further understanding and can make our own decisions. I have done this with countless topics regarding the C32 over the last four years and think I have contributed tremendously to the benefit of all who own our cars.
Castrol SRF has a DRY boiling point of 590 degrees and a WET boiling point of 518.
spr states "SRF is more hydroscopic and in fact will attract moisture less". I believe this statement is incorrect. SRF is LESS hygroscopic and will attract less moisture through rubber lines and other areas not completely sealed. This hygroscopic effect is different and does not address the moisture that developes in the system from brake fluid boiling, which is what we are concerned with when racing. And I have boiled my fluid on a regular basis at track days.
You always want to compare wet to wet. Second, just because one has a higher wet boiling point does not mean it’s the best fluid. There are many factors that contribute to brake fluid performance. Look at it another way – lets say the fluid in your car reaches a maximum temperature of 320 degrees. Would you really care if one fluid boils at 540 and another at 520?
Castrol SRF is great, but only for a racecar that is being used year-round and is bleed religiously. If the fluid allowed to seat in the system for a few months it begins to eat all rubber seals. I used to run it in the S4, but then I got sick of dealing with it. I still have a few un-open bottles left. If you want, I’ll sell them to you cheap.
IMHO Motul RBF600 is a great choice. Unless you are boiling your fluid, I’d stay away from SRF. It is just too hardcore for most members of this board. And if you are boiling your fluid, you are probably melting your pads too. So I would start with learning a better braking technique. If that does not solve the problem add cooling ducts.
Sounds good to me, I am trying to estimate how many quartz should I buy from the dealership. Thanks!
Last edited by OPM; Apr 30, 2007 at 11:26 PM.
Maybe I've had bad experiences, but I find that I screw things up a lot less than the dealers do -- and I know the quality of my work.



